Anticholinergics for treatment of asthma.

Asthma management guidelines emphasize the importance of effective treatment to achieve and maintain control of asthma. However, despite widely available and effective treatments, achieving control of asthma is still an unmet need for many patients. Adding a second bronchodilator with a different mechanism of action for the treatment of uncontrolled asthma can be a suitable therapeutic approach. This review focuses on the role of long-acting muscarinic antagonists, particularly tiotropium, in the treatment of asthma. A number of studies have evaluated the efficacy and safety of tiotropium in asthma patients whose disease is poorly controlled with inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) with or without long-acting ß2-agonists (LABAs). The effect on several clinical and lung function variables of adding tiotropium to an ICS is greater than doubling the dose of the latter and is not inferior to the addition of a LABA (salmeterol). Studies assessing the role of tiotropium as add-on therapy to ICS combined with a LABA have shown modest but clinically significant and dose-dependent improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1 second, as well as a decrease in the risk of exacerbations. In addition, time to the next episode is longer, particularly in patients who experience severe exacerbations. In conclusion, tiotropium proved noninferior to salmeterol and superior to placebo in patients with moderate-severe asthma who were not adequately controlled using ICSs or ICSs combined with a LABA. The major benefits are the increase in lung function and, in the case of severe asthma, the reduction in the frequency of exacerbations. In patients with asthma, tiotropium is usually well tolerated, and no potential safety signals have been observed.

A US database study characterizing patients initiating a budesonide-formoterol combination versus tiotropium bromide as initial maintenance therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical and demographic characteristics, resource utilization and costs of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients prior to initiating budesonide-formoterol combination (BFC) or tiotropium-maintenance therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study used claims-based diagnosis to identify COPD patients in the HealthCore Integrated Research Database who initiated BFC or tiotropium therapy between March 1, 2009 and January 31, 2012 (intake period); the index date was defined as the initial prescription fill for either agent. Patients diagnosed with respiratory tract cancer or receiving inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting ß2-adrenergic agonists or tiotropium in 12 months prior to index date were excluded. Categorical variables were evaluated with χ(2) tests; mean cost differences were evaluated using γ-regression. RESULTS: Overall, 6,940 BFC and 10,831 tiotropium patients were identified. The BFC group was younger (mean age 64 versus 67 years), with a greater proportion of females (54% versus 51%). BFC-treated patients had more comorbid respiratory conditions, including asthma (25% versus 13%), but fewer comorbid cardiovascular conditions, including atherosclerosis (7% versus 10%) and myocardial infarction (4% versus 6%). A greater proportion of BFC patients received prior respiratory medication, including oral corticosteroids (46% versus 35%) and short-acting ß2-agonists (44% versus 35%). Tiotropium-treated patients had a greater mean number of COPD-related outpatient visits (4.6 versus 4.1). BFC-treated patients had lower total all-cause ($17,259 versus $17,926) and COPD-related ($1,718 versus $1,930) health care costs, driven by lower all-cause and COPD-related inpatient expenditures. CONCLUSION: Initiators of BFC or tiotropium showed differences in clinical and demographic characteristics and health care utilization and costs prior to starting COPD maintenance therapy.

Cost effectiveness of tiotropium in patients with asthma poorly controlled on inhaled glucocorticosteroids and long-acting ß-agonists.

BACKGROUND: A considerable proportion of patients with asthma remain uncontrolled or symptomatic despite treatment with a high dose of inhaled glucocorticosteroids (ICSs) and long-acting ß2-agonists (LABAs). Tiotropium Respimat(®) added to usual care improves lung function, asthma control, and the frequency of non-severe and severe exacerbations, in a population of adult asthma patients who are uncontrolled despite treatment with ICS/LABA. OBJECTIVE: This study estimated the cost effectiveness of tiotropium therapy as add-on to usual care in asthma patients that are uncontrolled despite treatment with ICS/LABA combination from the perspective of the UK National Health Service (NHS). METHODS: A Markov model was developed which considers levels of asthma control and exacerbations. The model analysed cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs); sensitivity and scenario analyses were also conducted to test the robustness of the base case outcomes. All costs are given at 2012 prices. RESULTS: The model found that in this category of asthma with unmet need, add-on tiotropium therapy generated an incremental 0.24 QALYs and £5,238 costs over a lifetime horizon, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £21,906 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analysis suggested that findings were most dependent on the costs of managing uncontrolled asthma and the cost of treatment with tiotropium. CONCLUSION: In this modelled analysis of two clinical trials, tiotropium was found to be cost effective when added to usual care in patients who remain uncontrolled despite treatment with high-dose ICS/LABA. Further research should investigate the long-term treatment effectiveness of tiotropium.

Cost effectiveness of adding budesonide/formoterol to tiotropium in COPD in four Nordic countries.

OBJECTIVE: Assess the cost effectiveness of budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FORM) Turbuhaler(®)+tiotropium (TIO) HandiHaler(®) vs. placebo (PBO)+TIO in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) eligible for inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting ß2-agonists (ICS/LABA). METHODS: The cost-effectiveness analysis was based on the 12-week, randomised, double-blind CLIMB trial. The study included 659 patients with pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s ≤ 50% and ≥1 exacerbation requiring systemic glucocorticosteroids or antibiotics the preceding year. Patients received BUD/FORM 320/9 µg bid + TIO 18 µg qd or PBO bid + TIO 18 µg qd. Effectiveness was defined as the number of severe exacerbations (hospitalisation/emergency room visit/systemic glucocorticosteroids) avoided. A sub-analysis included antibiotics in the definition of an exacerbation. Resource use from CLIMB was combined with Danish (DKK), Finnish (€), Norwegian (NOK) and Swedish (SEK) unit costs (2010). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for BUD/FORM + TIO vs. PBO + TIO were estimated using descriptive statistics and uncertainty around estimates using bootstrapping. Analyses were conducted from the societal and healthcare perspectives in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. RESULTS: From a societal perspective, the ICER was estimated at €174/severe exacerbation avoided in Finland while BUD/FORM + TIO was dominant in the other countries. From the healthcare perspective, ICERs were DKK 1580 (€212), €307 and SEK 1573 (€165) per severe exacerbation avoided for Denmark, Finland and Sweden, respectively, while BUD/FORM + TIO was dominant in Norway. Including antibiotics decreased ICERs by 8-15%. Sensitivity analyses showed that results were overall robust. CONCLUSION: BUD/FORM + TIO represents a clinical and economic benefit to health systems and society for the treatment of COPD in the Nordic countries. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00496470).

A UK-based cost-utility analysis of indacaterol, a once-daily maintenance bronchodilator for patients with COPD, using real world evidence on resource use.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is a chronic, progressive disease that is not curable. However, there are effective treatments available. In the UK, long-acting bronchodilators are first-line treatments for COPD patients requiring maintenance therapy, and there are several options available. The aim of this study is to establish, from the UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective, the cost-effectiveness profile of indacaterol, the first once-daily long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA), compared with tiotropium and salmeterol, in patients with moderate to severe COPD. In assessing the cost-effectiveness of COPD therapies, this study has the advantage of using real world evidence on the resource use associated with COPD management across the spectrum of the disease. METHODS: A Markov model was developed with four health states following the GOLD classification for severity of airflow limitation. The model time horizon was 3 years, and the cycle length was 3 months. From each state, patients could experience a severe or non-severe exacerbation, move to a different COPD state, remain in the current state or die. Transition probabilities were based on data from the indacaterol clinical trials. The majority of the resource use data was taken from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database (OPCRD), which contains data from over 20,000 COPD patients in England and Scotland. Cost data were taken from UK-based sources and published literature and presented for the cost year 2011. Health-related quality of life was the main outcome of interest and utility data for the COPD states were based on data from the indacaterol clinical trials and disutility due to exacerbations were taken from the literature. Both one way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the results. RESULTS: Indacaterol dominated in the comparison with salmeterol producing an incremental QALY gain of 0.008 and cost savings of £110 per patient over a 3-year time horizon. In the comparison with tiotropium over the same time horizon, indacaterol remained the dominant strategy, producing an incremental QALY gain of 0.008 and cost savings of £248 per patient. The one-way sensitivity analysis indicates that the proportion of patients in each of the COPD stages and the mortality rate associated with Very Severe COPD are the variables with the largest impact on the results. The probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that over 72 % and 89 % of the iterations when compared with salmeterol and tiotropium, respectively, produced dominant results for indacaterol. CONCLUSION: The analyses demonstrate that indacaterol dominates both tiotropium and salmeterol in the base case and is likely to remain cost-effective under a range of assumptions.

Cost-effectiveness of tiotropium versus salmeterol: the POET-COPD trial.

The aim of this study was to perform a 1-yr trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of tiotropium versus salmeterol followed by a 5-yr model-based CEA. The within-trial CEA, including 7,250 patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), was performed alongside the 1-yr international randomised controlled Prevention of Exacerbations with Tiotropium (POET)-COPD trial comparing tiotropium with salmeterol regarding the effect on exacerbations. Main end-points of the trial-based analysis were costs, number of exacerbations and exacerbation days. The model-based analysis was conducted to extrapolate results to 5 yrs and to calculate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). 1-yr costs per patient from the German statutory health insurance (SHI) perspective and the societal perspective were €126 (95% uncertainty interval (UI) €55-195) and €170 (95% UI €77-260) higher for tiotropium, respectively. The annual number of exacerbations was 0.064 (95% UI 0.010-0.118) lower for tiotropium, leading to a reduction in exacerbation-related costs of €87 (95% UI €19-157). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €1,961 per exacerbation avoided from the SHI perspective and €2,647 from the societal perspective. In the model-based analyses, the 5-yr costs per QALY were €3,488 from the SHI perspective and €8,141 from the societal perspective. Tiotropium reduced exacerbations and exacerbation-related costs, but increased total costs. Tiotropium can be considered cost-effective as the resulting cost-effectiveness ratios were below commonly accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds.

Cost-utility analysis of tiotropium versus usual care in patients with COPD in the UK and Belgium.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-utility of adding tiotropium to usual care versus usual care alone for patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the UK and Belgium. METHODS: A four-state Markov model was developed with three disease severity states (moderate, severe, very severe) and death. Severity was based on post-bronchodilator FEV1 and transitions were based on outcomes of the Understanding Potential Long Term Impacts on Function with Tiotropium (UPLIFT®) trial. Utilities were derived from EQ-5D scores for a subset of UPLIFT® patients. UK costs were evaluated separately for England (E), and for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (SWNI). Belgian (B) costs were obtained from local sources. Uncertainty was assessed by deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA). RESULTS: Adding tiotropium to usual care resulted in an incremental cost per patient of €969 (B), £796 (E), and £812 (SWNI), and incremental QALYs of 0.052 (B), and 0.051 (E, SWNI). The four-year incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were €18,617 (B), £15,567 (E) and £15,890 (SWNI) per QALY. Probability of tiotropium being cost-effective at £30,000 (€50,000) per QALY gained was greater than 60%. CONCLUSIONS: At willingness to pay thresholds of £(€) 30,000 per QALY gained, adding tiotropium to usual care is cost-effective.

Which long-acting bronchodilator is most cost-effective for the treatment of COPD?

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of tiotropium versus salmeterol to inform decision making within the Dutch healthcare setting. METHODS: A previously published, validated COPD progression model was updated with new exacerbation data and adapted to the Dutch setting by including Dutch estimates of healthcare use for COPD maintenance treatment and Dutch unit costs. Exacerbation data from the POET-COPD trial were combined with evidence from earlier tiotropium studies using Bayesian meta-analysis. The model-based analysis was performed using a one- and five-year time horizon. Main health outcomes were the number of exacerbations and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). RESULTS: One-year costs per patient from the healthcare perspective were v1370 for tiotropium and v1359 for salmeterol; a difference of v11 (95% uncertainty interval (UI): -198-212). The annual number of exacerbations was 0.068 (-0.005-0.140) lower in the tiotropium group. The number of QALYs in the tiotropium group was 0.011 (-0.019-0.049) higher, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of v1015 per QALY. After five years, the difference in exacerbations, QALYs and costs between the tiotropium and salmeterol group were -0.435 (-0.915-0.107), 0.079 (-0.272-0.520) and v-277 (-1586-1074), respectively, indicating that tiotropium was more effective and less costly. Using a societal perspective, tiotropium dominated salmeterol both after one and five years. CONCLUSION: Tiotropium reduced exacerbations and exacerbation-related costs. After one year the cost per QALY of tiotropium compared with salmeterol was very low, while after five years tiotropium was found to dominate salmeterol.

Tiotropium versus long-acting beta-agonists for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: Tiotropium and long-acting beta(2)-agonists (LABAs) are both accepted in the routine management for people with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). There are new studies which have compared tiotropium with LABAs, including some that have evaluated recently introduced LABAs. OBJECTIVES: To compare the relative clinical effects of tiotropium bromide alone versus LABA alone, upon measures of quality of life, exacerbations, lung function and serious adverse events, in people with stable COPD.To critically appraise and summarise current evidence on the costs and cost-effectiveness associated with tiotropium compared to LABA in people with COPD. SEARCH METHODS: We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials and economic evaluations from searching NHS EED and HEED (date of last search February 2012). We found additional trials from web-based clinical trial registers. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included RCTs and full economic evaluations if they compared effects of tiotropium alone with LABAs alone in people with COPD. We allowed co-administration of standard COPD therapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, then extracted data on study quality and outcomes. We contacted study authors and trial sponsors for additional information. We analysed data using the Cochrane Review Manager(RevMan 5.1) software. MAIN RESULTS: Seven clinical studies totalling 12,223 participants with COPD were included in the review. The studies used similar designs and were generally of good methodological quality. Inclusion criteria for RCTs were similar across the included studies, although studies varied in terms of smoking history and COPD severity of participants. They compared tiotropium (which was delivered by HandiHaler in all studies) with salmeterol (four studies, 8936 participants), formoterol (one study, 431 participants) and indacaterol (two studies, 2856 participants). All participants were instructed to discontinue anticholinergic or long-acting beta(2)-agonist bronchodilators during treatment, but could receive inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) at a stable dose. Study duration ranged from 3 to 12 months. We extracted data for 11,223 participants. In general, the treatment groups were well matched at baseline. Overall, the risk of bias across the included RCTs was low.In the analysis of the primary outcomes in this review, a high level of heterogeneity amongst studies meant that we did not pool data for St George's Respiratory Questionnaire quality of life score. Subgroup analyses based on the type of LABA found statistically significant differences among effects on quality of life depending on whether tiotropium was compared with salmeterol, formoterol or indacaterol. Tiotropium reduced the number of participants experiencing one or more exacerbations compared with LABA (odds ratio (OR) 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 0.93). For this outcome, there was no difference seen among the different types of LABA. There was no statistical difference in mortality observed between the treatment groups.For secondary outcomes, tiotropium was associated with a reduction in the number of COPD exacerbations leading to hospitalisation compared with LABA treatment (OR 0.87; 95% 0.77 to 0.99), but not in the overall rate of all-cause hospitalisations. There was no statistically significant difference in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) or symptom score between tiotropium and LABA-treated participants. There was a lower rate of non-fatal serious adverse events recorded with tiotropium compared with LABA (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.99). The tiotropium group was also associated with a lower rate of study withdrawals (OR 0.89; 95% CI 0.81 to 0.99).We identified six full economic evaluations assessing the cost and cost-effectiveness of tiotropium and salmeterol. The studies were based on an economic model or empirical analysis of clinical data from RCTs. They all looked at maintenance costs and the costs for COPD exacerbations, including respiratory medications and hospitalisations. The setting for the evaluations was primary and secondary care in the UK, Greece, Netherlands, Spain and USA. All the studies estimated tiotropium to be superior to salmeterol based on better clinical outcomes (exacerbations or quality of life) and/or lower total costs. However, the authors of all evaluations reported there was substantial uncertainty around the results. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In people with COPD, the evidence is equivocal as to whether or not tiotropium offers greater benefit than LABAs in improving quality of life; however, this is complicated by differences in effect among the LABA types. Tiotropium was more effective than LABAs as a group in preventing COPD exacerbations and disease-related hospitalisations, although there were no statistical differences between groups in overall hospitalisation rates or mortality during the study periods. There were fewer serious adverse events and study withdrawals recorded with tiotropium compared with LABAs. Symptom improvement and changes in lung function were similar between the treatment groups. Given the small number of studies to date, with high levels of heterogeneity among them, one approach may be to give a COPD patient a substantial trial of tiotropium, followed by a LABA (or vice versa), then to continue prescribing the long-acting bronchodilator that the patient prefers. Further studies are needed to compare tiotropium with different LABAs, which are currently ongoing. The available economic evidence indicates that tiotropium may be cost-effective compared with salmeterol in several specific settings, but there is considerable uncertainty around this finding.

Clinical and economic outcomes in an observational study of COPD maintenance therapies: multivariable regression versus propensity score matching.

PURPOSE: To investigate equivalency of results from multivariable regression (MR) and propensity score matching (PSM) models, observational research methods used to mitigate bias stemming from non-randomization (and consequently unbalanced groups at baseline), using, as an example, a large study of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) initial maintenance therapy. METHODS: Patients were 32,338 health plan members, age ≥40 years, with COPD initially treated with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol combination (FSC), tiotropium (TIO), or ipratropium (IPR) alone or in combination with albuterol. Using MR and PSM methods, the proportion of patients with COPD-related health care utilization, mean costs, odds ratios (ORs), and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for utilization events were calculated for the 12 months following therapy initiation. RESULTS: Of 12,595 FSC, 9126 TIO, and 10,617 IPR patients meeting MR inclusion criteria, 89.1% (8135) of TIO and 80.2% (8514) of IPR patients were matched to FSC patients for the PSM analysis. Methods produced substantially similar findings for mean cost comparisons, ORs, and IRRs for most utilization events. In contrast to MR, for TIO compared to FSC, PSM did not produce statistically significant ORs for hospitalization or outpatient visit with antibiotic or significant IRRs for hospitalization or outpatient visit with oral corticosteroid. As in the MR analysis, compared to FSC, ORs and IRRs for all other utilization events, as well as mean costs, were less favorable for IPR and TIO. CONCLUSION: In this example of an observational study of maintenance therapy for COPD, more than 80% of the original treatment groups used in the MR analysis were matched to comparison treatment groups for the PSM analysis. While some sample size was lost in the PSM analysis, results from both methods were similar in direction and statistical significance, suggesting that MR and PSM were equivalent methods for mitigating bias.

Rehospitalization risks and outcomes in COPD patients receiving maintenance pharmacotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: To determine clinical and economic outcomes following COPD-related hospitalization/emergency department (ED) care in patients receiving COPD maintenance therapy. METHODS: In this retrospective, observational study using administrative claims data, we identified COPD patients age ≥40 years who received maintenance therapy within 30 days of an initial COPD-related hospitalization or ED visit with: (1) fluticasone propionate/salmeterol combination (FSC 250 mcg/50 mcg) as new therapy, or (2) an anticholinergic (AC; tiotropium or ipratropium with or without albuterol). The FSC and AC patients were matched (1:3 ratio) on various baseline characteristics using propensity scores to mitigate selection bias at baseline. The proportion of patients with COPD-related healthcare events, the mean event rates, and the mean costs in the subsequent 12 months were calculated. RESULTS: The FSC cohort (N = 484) had a significantly lower proportion of rehospitalized patients during follow-up than did the AC cohort (N = 1452), 3.1% versus 4.6% (P = 0.047). The mean number of rehospitalizations was 0.03 in the FSC cohort and 0.07 in the AC cohort (P = 0.001). The proportion of patients with an exacerbation resulting in an ED or physician-outpatient visit and the mean number of such visits did not differ between cohorts. Total annual COPD-related medical costs were lower for FSC than for AC ($2080 versus $2636, P = 0.006), with lower medical and higher pharmacy costs. CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving FSC as maintenance therapy following an initial COPD-related hospitalization or ED visit experienced better clinical and economic outcomes than patients receiving AC.

Comparative health-care cost advantage of ipratropium over tiotropium in COPD patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the total direct health-care costs of patients treated with tiotropium and ipratropium. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study of health-care costs in British Columbia, Canada, by comparing new patients on tiotropium with new patients on ipratropium. Direct health-care costs for study patients were measured in the first 2 years after initiating inhaled anticholinergic treatment. Differences in direct health-care costs between tiotropium and ipratropium patients were estimated by using quantile regression. We analyzed cost differences in the 10th percentile, median, and 90th percentile of patients by cost. High-dimensional propensity score analysis was used as a method of adjustment for potential confounding factors. RESULTS: The study population had 3,140 tiotropium patients and 26,182 ipratropium patients. Higher health system costs in patients who started on tiotropium instead of ipratropium were observed in patients in the median and 10th percentile. The magnitude of these increases was comparable to the price difference between the two drugs. Health system costs in the 90th percentile were not significantly different between tiotropium and ipratropium patients. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study did not support the preferential use of tiotropium over ipratropium as a basis for savings in direct health-care costs.

Observational study on the impact of initiating tiotropium alone versus tiotropium with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol combination therapy on outcomes and costs in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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.

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.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of roflumilast/tiotropium therapy versus tiotropium monotherapy for treating severe-to-very severe COPD.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing roflumilast/tiotropium therapy vs tiotropium monotherapy in patients with severe-to-very severe COPD. METHODS: The economic evaluation applied a disease-based Markov cohort model with five health states: (1) severe COPD, (2) severe COPD with a history of severe exacerbation, (3) very severe COPD, (4) very severe COPD with a history of severe exacerbation, and (5) death. Within a given health state, a patient may have a mild/moderate or severe exacerbation or die. Data from roflumilast clinical trials and published literature were used to populate model parameters. The model calculated health outcomes and costs for roflumilast/tiotropium therapy vs tiotropium monotherapy over a 5-year horizon. Incremental cost and benefits were then calculated as cost-effectiveness ratios, including cost per exacerbation avoided and cost per quality adjusted life year ($/QALY). RESULTS: Over a 5-year horizon, the estimated incremental costs per exacerbation and per severe exacerbation avoided were $589 and $5869, respectively, and the incremental cost per QALY was $15,815. One-way sensitivity analyses varying key parameters produced an incremental cost per QALY ranging from $1963-$32,773. LIMITATIONS: A number of key parameters used in the model were obtained from studies in the literature that were conducted under different contexts. Specifically, the relative risk estimate for severe COPD patients originates from a small trial not designed to demonstrate the impact of roflumilast on frequency of exacerbations. In addition, the model extrapolates the relative risk estimates over periods of 5-30 years, even though the estimates were only observed in trials that spanned less than a year. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of roflumilast to tiotropium is cost-effective for the treatment of severe to very severe COPD patients.

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.

Trends in health care utilization in British Columbia following public coverage for tiotropium.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the use and cost of health-care services in British Columbia, Canada, before and after public drug coverage for tiotropium bromide. METHODS: A time series analysis was performed using data from British Columbia's centralized administrative health-care databases. Linear regression on data from a stable 3-year prepolicy period was used to predict future use of inhaled anticholinergic (IAC) medications, visits to physicians, emergency hospitalizations, and costs. For each use measure, we estimated the policy effect as the difference between observed use in the postpolicy period and predicted use obtained from the prepolicy period. RESULTS: In total, over the 2.5-year period after public coverage, tiotropium use increased by 24.4% more than predicted (95% confidence interval [CI] 23.9%-24.8%). Visits to physicians were unchanged, but there were between 596 and 948 more emergency admissions for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and between 582 and 1940 more hospital admissions of any kind than were predicted from prepolicy data. Total cost of inhaled IAC medications increased slightly more than predicted, by between an additional CDN$1.30 million and CDN$1.71 million, but total out-of-pocket spending by patients on IAC medications was reduced by between CDN$2.83 million and CDN$3.11 million because of public coverage. Hospital costs were between CDN$3.88 million and CDN$12.93 million greater than anticipated based on prepolicy data. CONCLUSIONS: Public drug plan coverage for tiotropium in British Columbia reduced out-of-pocket costs for patients and their private insurers. Before versus after time series analysis did not show a reduction in hospitalizations or physician visits, or costs associated with those services.

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 ß2-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.