Comparative efficacy of fixed-dose combinations of long-acting muscarinic antagonists and long-acting ß2-agonists: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A number of long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA) fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) for treatment of moderate-to-very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have recently become available, but none have been directly compared in head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The purpose of this study was to assess the relative clinical benefit of all currently available LAMA/LABA FDCs using a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA). METHODS: A systematic literature review identified RCTs investigating the efficacy, safety and quality of life associated with licensed LAMA/LABA FDCs for the treatment of moderate-to-very severe COPD. RCTs were screened for inclusion in the NMA using prespecified eligibility criteria. Data were extracted for outcomes of interest, including change in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (tFEV1) from baseline, St. George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) percentage of responders, Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) percentage of responders, change in SGRQ score from baseline, change in TDI focal score from baseline, moderate-to-severe exacerbations, all-cause discontinuation, and discontinuation due to adverse events. RESULTS: Following screening, a total of 27 trials from 26 publications with 30,361 subjects were eligible for inclusion in the NMA. Nonsignificant results were seen in most analyses comparing efficacy, exacerbations and discontinuation rates of included LAMA/LABA FDCs (i.e. aclidinium/formoterol 400/12 µg, glycopyrronium/indacaterol 110/50 µg, tiotropium + olodaterol 5/5 µg, umeclidinium/vilanterol 62.5/25 µg). Meta-regression controlling for post-bronchodilator percentage of tFEV1 predicted at baseline as well as meta-regression adjusting for concomitant use of inhaled corticosteroids at baseline was performed to assess the magnitude of effect modification and produced similar results as observed in the base case analysis. CONCLUSION: All LAMA/LABA FDCs were found to have similar efficacy and safety. Definitive assessment of the relative efficacy of different treatments can only be performed through direct comparison in head-to-head RCTs. In the absence of such data, this indirect comparison may be of value in clinical and health economic decision-making.

Los costes del ictus en España según su etiología. El protocolo del estudio CONOCES / The costs of stroke in Spain by aetiology: the CONOCES study protocol

Introducción: Los pacientes con ictus asociado a fibrilación auricular no valvular (FANV) constituyen un grupo específico con gran repercusión social y económica. El objetivo principal del estudio CONOCES, cuyo protocolo se presenta en ese trabajo, es comparar los costes del infarto cerebral en los pacientes con FANV frente a los pacientes sin FANV en el ámbito sanitario español ingresados en unidades de ictus, utilizando la perspectiva de la sociedad. Materiales y métodos: CONOCES es un estudio epidemiológico, observacional, naturalístico, prospectivo y multicéntrico de los costes de la enfermedad, en una muestra de pacientes que ha sufrido un ictus establecido e ingresado en una unidad de ictus, en el ámbito sanitario español. El periodo de seguimiento será de 12 meses. Se recogerán variables sociodemográficas, clínicas, la escala de ictus del NIH, el nivel de discapacidad, el grado de dependencia funcional mediante la escala de Rankin modificada y el consumo de recursos sanitarios (hospitalización en el primer episodio, reingresos, rehabilitación ambulatoria, material ortoprotésico, medicación para la prevención secundaria, consultas médicas, atención de enfermería, servicios sociales de atención formal). También se registrará la renta mensual estimada, la pérdida de productividad laboral y la calidad de vida relacionada con la salud con el cuestionario genérico EQ-5D. Por último se entrevistará directamente al cuidador para conocer la pérdida de productividad, los cuidados informales prestados y la sobrecarga del cuidador. Resultados y conclusiones: La aportación del estudio CONOCES permitirá profundizar en las diferencias del impacto tanto económico como clínico del ictus en función de su asociación con la FANV (AU)

Introduction: Patients with stroke associated with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) are a specific group, and their disease has a considerable social and economic impact. The primary objective of the CONOCES study, the protocol of which is presented here, is to compare the costs of stroke in NVAF patients to those of patients without NVAF in Spanish stroke units from a societal perspective. Materials and methods: CONOCES is an epidemiological, observational, naturalistic, prospective, multicentre study of the cost of the illness in a sample of patients who have suffered a stroke and were admitted to a Spanish stroke unit. During a 12-month follow-up period, we record sociodemographic and clinical variables, score on the NIH stroke scale, level of disability, degree of functional dependency according to the modified Rankin scale, and use of healthcare resources (hospitalisation at the time of the first episode, readmissions, outpatient rehabilitation, orthotic and/or prosthetic material, medication for secondary prevention, medical check-ups, nursing care and formal social care services). Estimated monthly income, lost work productivity and health-related quality of life measured with the generic EQ-5D questionnaire are also recorded. We also administer a direct interview to the caregiver to determine loss of productivity, informal care, and caregiver burden. Results and conclusions: The CONOCES study will provide more in-depth information about the economic and clinical impact of stroke according to whether or not it is associated with NVAF (AU)

The costs of stroke in Spain by aetiology: the CONOCES study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with stroke associated with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) are a specific group, and their disease has a considerable social and economic impact. The primary objective of the CONOCES study, the protocol of which is presented here, is to compare the costs of stroke in NVAF patients to those of patients without NVAF in Spanish stroke units from a societal perspective. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CONOCES is an epidemiological, observational, naturalistic, prospective, multicentre study of the cost of the illness in a sample of patients who have suffered a stroke and were admitted to a Spanish stroke unit. During a 12-month follow-up period, we record sociodemographic and clinical variables, score on the NIH stroke scale, level of disability, degree of functional dependency according to the modified Rankin scale, and use of healthcare resources (hospitalisation at the time of the first episode, readmissions, outpatient rehabilitation, orthotic and/or prosthetic material, medication for secondary prevention, medical check-ups, nursing care and formal social care services). Estimated monthly income, lost work productivity and health-related quality of life measured with the generic EQ-5D questionnaire are also recorded. We also administer a direct interview to the caregiver to determine loss of productivity, informal care, and caregiver burden. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The CONOCES study will provide more in-depth information about the economic and clinical impact of stroke according to whether or not it is associated with NVAF.

Treatment patterns, use of resources, and costs of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients in Spain: results from a Delphi panel

INTRODUCTION: Approximately 80-85% of lung cancer patients are diagnosed with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), of which 50% of patients present with advanced or metastatic disease. The objective of this study was to describe treatment patterns, use of resources and costs associated with treating advanced or metastatic NSCLC patients in Spain. METHODS: A two-round Delphi consensus panel of clinical experts was carried out to describe local clinical patterns based on treatment algorithms from SEOM and ASCO treatment guidelines. The panel consisted of 19 oncologists and 1 hospital pharmacist, who were asked during the first round to define therapeutic pathways for NSCLC by the patients' performance status, age and histology; to quantify the use of resources associated with the preparation and administration of anticancer pharmacotherapy; management of adverse events associated with anticancer pharmacotherapy; and best supportive care (BSC). The second round was used to try to reduce the variability of responses in some questions and to further describe differences between intravenous and oral therapy. 2009 unit costs were applied to the use of resources described by the clinical experts. The perspective of the study was from the Spanish National Healthcare System. RESULTS: Performance status guided therapy decision and led to differences in costs. Patients with a performance status of 0-2 were expected to receive anticancer pharmacotherapy while patients with a performance status of 3-4 received BSC including analgesics and corticosteroids. Anticancer pharmacotherapies containing cisplatin or carboplatin were used preferably in first-line treatment, while the usual second- and third-line treatments were docetaxel, erlotinib or pemetrexed monotherapy. The importance of the cost of anticancer pharmacotherapy as a proportion of total healthcare costs was higher for combination therapies containing bevacizumab or pemetrexed. The anticancer pharmacotherapies associated with adverse events like febrile neutropenia or infection increased the total treatment cost. Administration costs were more relevant in regimens containing cisplatin and were low for orally administered therapies. The total cost per patient with advanced or metastatic NSCLC from starting anticancer therapy until death was estimated to be between €11,301 and €32,754 depending on the number of treatment lines received. CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of advanced or metastatic NSCLC, healthcare costs are impacted by line of treatment, patient performance status, type of administration of therapy and adverse event management (AU)