Comparing Costs and Healthcare Resource Utilization (HCRU) Using LAMA versus LABA/ICS at Treatment Initiation for COPD: Findings from CITRUS (Comparing the Incidence of Tiotropium and ICS/LABA in Real-World Use in South Korea) Study.

Background: COPD causes substantial economic burden on healthcare. Alternative treatment strategies for COPD can be associated with different costs dependent upon their relative safety and effectiveness. We compared costs and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) associated with LAMA or LABA/ICS initiation. Methods: Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, we enrolled COPD patients initiating treatment with LAMA or LABA/ICS between January 2005 and April 2015. Propensity score matched individuals were compared on all-cause and COPD-related medical costs and HCRU over a three-year follow-up period. Results: A total of 2444 patients were enrolled in each treatment group. LAMA group was associated with significantly lower costs than LABA/ICS group, both in all-cause (403.08 vs 474.50 USD per patient per month [PPPM], cost ratio 1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.10-1.26, p<0.0001) and COPD-related (216.37 vs 267.32 USD PPPM, cost ratio 1.24, 95% CI=1.13-1.35, p<0.0001) medical costs. All-cause HCRU was not significantly different between groups, while COPD-related HRCU was higher in LAMA group (0.66 vs 0.60 medical visits PPPM, p<0.0001). Conclusion: COPD patients initiating treatment with LAMA were associated with lower all-cause and COPD-related medical costs than those starting with LABA/ICS despite the similar all-cause HCRU and higher COPD-related HCRU. Initiation with LAMA is a cost-efficient option for the treatment of COPD.

Legal demands of the tiotropium bromide for treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and their financial impact for the State of Paraná, Brazil.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the legal demands of tiotropium bromide to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. METHODS: We included secondary data from the pharmaceutical care management systems made available by the Paraná State Drug Center. RESULTS: Public interest civil action and ordinary procedures, among others, were the most common used by the patients to obtain the medicine. Two Health Centers in Paraná (Londrina and Umuarama) concentrated more than 50% of the actions. The most common specialty of physicians who prescribed (33.8%) was pulmonology. There is a small financial impact of tiotropium bromide on general costs with medicines of the Paraná State Drug Center. However, a significant individual financial impact was observed because one unit of the medicine represents 38% of the Brazilian minimum wage. CONCLUSION: Our study highlights the need of incorporating this medicine in the class of long-acting anticholinergic bronchodilator in the Brazilian public health system.

Legal demands of the tiotropium bromide for treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and their financial impact for the State of Paraná, Brazil / Demandas judiciais do uso de brometo tiotrópio para o tratamento da doença pulmonar obstrutiva crônica e o impacto financeiro para o Estado do Paraná, Brasil

ABSTRACT Objective To analyze the legal demands of tiotropium bromide to treat chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Methods We included secondary data from the pharmaceutical care management systems made available by the Paraná State Drug Center. Results Public interest civil action and ordinary procedures, among others, were the most common used by the patients to obtain the medicine. Two Health Centers in Paraná (Londrina and Umuarama) concentrated more than 50% of the actions. The most common specialty of physicians who prescribed (33.8%) was pulmonology. There is a small financial impact of tiotropium bromide on general costs with medicines of the Paraná State Drug Center. However, a significant individual financial impact was observed because one unit of the medicine represents 38% of the Brazilian minimum wage. Conclusion Our study highlights the need of incorporating this medicine in the class of long-acting anticholinergic bronchodilator in the Brazilian public health system.

RESUMO Objetivo Analisar as demandas judiciais do brometo de tiotrópio para tratar a doença pulmonar obstrutiva crônica. Métodos Foram considerados dados secundários dos sistemas gerenciais de assistência farmacêutica, disponibilizados pelo Centro de Medicamentos do Paraná. Resultados Ações civis públicas e ações ordinárias, de procedimento comum, entre outras, foram as mais praticadas pelos pacientes para obter o medicamento. Duas Regionais de Saúde do Paraná (Londrina e Umuarama) concentraram mais de 50% das ações. Quanto à especialidade dos médicos prescritores, 33,8% eram pneumologistas. Verificou-se discreto impacto financeiro do brometo de tiotrópio nos gastos gerais com medicamentos pelo Centro de Medicamentos do Paraná. Entretanto, também houve relevante impacto financeiro individual, pois uma unidade do medicamento consome 38% do salário mínimo. Conclusão O estudo aponta para a necessidade de incorporação deste medicamento da classe broncodilatadores anticolinérgicos de longa duração, no Sistema Único de Saúde.

Exploratory analysis of requests for authorization to dispense high-cost medication to COPD patients: the São Paulo "protocol".

OBJECTIVE: A resolution passed by the government of the Brazilian state of São Paulo established a protocol for requesting free COPD medications, including tiotropium bromide, creating regional authorization centers to evaluate and approve such requests, given the high cost of those medications. Our objective was to analyze the requests received by an authorization center that serves cities in the greater metropolitan area of (the city of) São Paulo between 2011 and 2016. METHODS: Data regarding the authorization, return, or rejection of the requests were compiled and analyzed in order to explain those outcomes. Subsequently, the clinical and functional data related to the patients were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 7,762 requests for dispensing COPD medication were analyzed. Requests related to male patients predominated. Among the corresponding patients, the mean age was 66 years, 12% were smokers, 88% had frequent exacerbations, and 84% had severe/very severe dyspnea. The mean FEV1 was 37.2% of the predicted value. The total number of requests decreased by 24.5% from 2012 to 2013 and was lowest in 2015. Most (65%) of the requests were accepted. The main reasons for the rejection/return of a request were a post-bronchodilator FEV1/FVC ratio > 0.7, a post-bronchodilator FEV1 > 50% of the predicted value, and failure to provide information regarding previous use of a long-acting ß2 agonist. During the study period, the total number of requests returned/rejected decreased slightly, and there was improvement in the quality of the data included on the forms. CONCLUSIONS: Here, we have identified the characteristics of the requests for COPD medications and of the corresponding patients per region served by the authorization center analyzed, thus contributing to the improvement of local public health care measures.

Costs, exacerbations and pneumonia after initiating combination tiotropium olodaterol versus triple therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Aim: To compare health plan-paid costs, exacerbations and pneumonia outcomes for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) initiating combination tiotropium olodaterol (TIO + OLO) versus triple therapy (TT: long-acting muscarinic antagonist + long-acting ß2 agonists + inhaled corticosteroid). Patients & methods: COPD patients initiating TIO + OLO or TT between 1 January 2014 and 30 June 2016 were identified from a managed care Medicare database and balanced for baseline characteristics using inverse probability of treatment weighting before assessment of outcomes. Results: Annual COPD-related and all-cause costs were US$4118 (35%) and US$5384 (23%) lower for TIO + OLO versus TT (both p ≤ 0.001). TIO + OLO patients had nearly half the severe exacerbations (8.3 vs 15.5%; p = 0.014) and pneumonia was also less common (18.9 vs 30.9%; p < 0.001). Conclusion: TIO + OLO was associated with improved economic and COPD health outcomes versus TT.

Tiotropium in asthma: From bench to bedside.

OBJECTIVE: Tiotropium is a long-acting muscarinic antagonist approved for maintenance treatment of asthma in children, adolescents, and adults in the United States, and recommended as add-on treatment for uncontrolled asthma despite treatment with inhaled corticosteroids and/or long-acting beta-2 agonists. This review traces the journey of tiotropium from its historical origins through early preclinical testing to human clinical trials and real-life studies. DATA SOURCES: A search was performed in PubMed using search terms 'tiotropium' and 'asthma.' Relevant references cited in those articles were reviewed. STUDY SELECTIONS: English language articles published from December 2008-December 2018 were screened. Articles evaluating the efficacy, cost-effectiveness, real-life evidence, and steroid-sparing effect of tiotropium with inadequately controlled asthma were included. RESULTS: Anticholinergics have a long history of use in the treatment of obstructive airway diseases. Evidence indicates that tiotropium's mechanism of action consists of bronchodilation and diminished mucus secretion, with preclinical evidence suggesting an anti-inflammatory effect as well. Phase 2 and 3 clinical trials have demonstrated that tiotropium is efficacious and safe, resulting in significant improvements in lung function in adults, adolescents, and children across asthma severities. Emerging evidence suggests that add-on tiotropium might potentially enable reductions in inhaled corticosteroid dose in patients with uncontrolled asthma. Further, tiotropium is a cost-effective treatment option that is also effective in the clinical practice setting. CONCLUSIONS: An increasing body of evidence indicates that tiotropium can play a significant role in the treatment of patients with uncontrolled asthma.

Long-term cost-effectiveness of the fixed-dose combination of tiotropium plus olodaterol based on the DYNAGITO trial results.

PURPOSE: Combinations of long-acting bronchodilators are recommended to reduce the rate of COPD exacerbations. Evidence from the DYNAGITO trial showed that the fixed-dose combination of tiotropium + olodaterol reduced the annual rate of total exacerbations (P<0.05) compared with tiotropium monotherapy. This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the fixed-dose combination of tiotropium + olodaterol vs tiotropium monotherapy in COPD patients in the French setting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A recently developed COPD patient-level simulation model was used to simulate the lifetime effects and costs for 15,000 patients receiving either tiotropium + olodaterol or tiotropium monotherapy by applying the reduction in annual exacerbation rate as observed in the DYNAGITO trial. The model was adapted to the French setting by including French unit costs for treatment medication, COPD maintenance treatment, COPD exacerbations (moderate or severe), and pneumonia. The main outcomes were the annual (severe) exacerbation rate, the number of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and total lifetime costs. RESULTS: The number of QALYs for treatment with tiotropium + olodaterol was 0.042 higher compared with tiotropium monotherapy. Using a societal perspective, tiotropium + olodaterol resulted in a cost increase of +€123 and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €2,900 per QALY compared with tiotropium monotherapy. From a French National Sickness Fund perspective, total lifetime costs were reduced by €272 with tiotropium + olodaterol, resulting in tiotropium + olodaterol being the dominant treatment option, that is, more effects with less costs. Sensitivity analyses showed that reducing the cost of exacerbations by 34% increased the ICER to €15,400, which could still be considered cost-effective in the French setting. CONCLUSION: Treatment with tiotropium + olodaterol resulted in a gain in QALYs and savings in costs compared with tiotropium monotherapy using a National Sickness Fund perspective in France. From the societal perspective, tiotropium + olodaterol was found to be cost-effective with a low cost per QALY.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of umeclidinium bromide/vilanterol 62.5/25 mcg versus tiotropium/olodaterol 5/5 mcg in symptomatic patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a Spanish National Healthcare System perspective.

BACKGROUND: A head-to-head study demonstrated the superiority of once-daily umeclidinium bromide/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) 62.5/25 mcg on trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) versus once-daily tiotropium/olodaterol (TIO/OLO) 5/5 mcg in symptomatic patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This analysis evaluated the cost effectiveness of UMEC/VI versus TIO/OLO from a Spanish National Healthcare System perspective, using data from this study and Spanish literature. METHODS: This analysis was conducted from the perspective of the Spanish National Healthcare System with a 3-year horizon as base case. A disease progression model using a linked risk equation approach was used to estimate disease progression and associated healthcare costs, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The Evaluation of COPD Longitudinally to Identify Predictive Surrogate Endpoints (ECLIPSE) study was used to develop the statistical risk equations for clinical endpoints, and costs were calculated using a health state approach (by dyspnea severity). Utilities for QALY calculation were estimated using patient baseline characteristics within a regression fit to Spanish observational data. Treatment effect, expressed as change from baseline in FEV1 was obtained from the head-to-head study and used in the model (UMEC/VI minus TIO/OLO difference: + 52 mL [95% confidence interval: 28, 77]). Baseline patient characteristics were sourced from Spanish literature or the head-to-head study if unavailable. A scenario analysis using only the intent-to-treat (ITT) population from the head-to-head study, and sensitivity analyses (including probabilistic sensitivity analyses), were conducted. Direct healthcare costs (2017 Euro) were obtained from Spanish sources and costs and benefits were discounted at 3% per annum. RESULTS: UMEC/VI was associated with small improvements in QALYs (+ 0.029) over a 3-year time horizon, compared with TIO/OLO, alongside cost savings of €393/patient. The ITT scenario analysis and sensitivity analyses had similar results. All probabilistic simulations resulted in UMEC/VI being less costly and more effective than TIO/OLO. CONCLUSION: UMEC/VI dominated TIO/OLO (more effective and less expensive). These results may aid payers and decision-makers in Spain when making judgements on which long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting ß2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) treatments can be considered cost effective in Spain.

Clinical and economic outcomes associated with the use of fluticasone propionate 250 mcg and salmeterol 50 mcg combination versus tiotropium bromide 18 mcg as initial maintenance treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in managed care.

AIMS: To examine the clinical and economic outcomes associated with the use of long-acting bronchodilators for initial maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) by analyzing health insurance claims data in the US. METHODS: A retrospective, observational, matched cohort study used health insurance claims data (January 2008 to June 2013) to assess COPD-related outcomes for subjects aged ≥40 years. Subjects were assigned to a study cohort according to the first observed prescription fill for a long-acting bronchodilator (fluticasone propionate 250 mcg/salmeterol 50 mcg [FSC] or tiotropium bromide 18 mcg [TIO]). The analysis period for each subject comprised a 1-year pre-index date and 1-year post-index date. Primary outcome measure was total COPD-related costs per-patient per-year (PPPY) during the follow-up period. Secondary outcome measures included COPD-related exacerbations and the components of COPD-related costs. RESULTS: Overall, 24,040 subjects were identified; the analysis sample consisted of 19,090 subjects (9,545 per cohort) with no significant differences between cohorts. Mean COPD-related total costs PPPY were numerically lower among the FSC cohort; however, the difference was not statistically significant ($2,224 [±4,108] vs $2,352 [±3,721], p = .057). There was no difference between cohorts for COPD-related medical costs (p = .894). COPD-related pharmacy costs were significantly, yet modestly, lower in the FSC cohort compared with the TIO cohort ($1,160 [±1,106] vs 1,275 [±1,110], p < .001). There were no statistically significant differences in the rate or number of exacerbations between the matched cohorts. LIMITATIONS: While propensity scoring achieved balance in baseline characteristics, some residual confounding unobserved in the database may be present. CONCLUSIONS: Few clinical and economic differences between subjects initiating maintenance therapy with FSC or TIO were observed.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of umeclidinium/vilanterol for the management of patients with moderate to very severe COPD using an economic model.

BACKGROUND: Bronchodilators such as long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) and long-acting ß2-agonists (LABAs) are central to the pharmacological management of COPD. Dual bronchodilation with umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI; 62.5/25 µg) is a novel LAMA/LABA combination approved for maintenance treatment for patients with COPD. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of maintenance treatment with UMEC/VI compared with tiotropium (TIO) 18 µg, open dual LAMA + LABA treatment, or no long-acting bronchodilator treatment in patients with moderate to very severe COPD. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to estimate the costs and outcomes associated with UMEC/VI treatment in patients with moderate to very severe COPD (GSK study number: HO-13-13411). Clinical efficacy, costs, utilities, and mortality obtained from the published literature were used as the model inputs. Costs are presented in US dollars based on 2015 prices. The model outputs are total costs, drug costs, other medical costs, number of COPD exacerbations, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Costs and outcomes were discounted at a 3% annual rate. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the effects of changing parameters on the uncertainty of the results. RESULTS: UMEC/VI treatment for moderate to very severe COPD was associated with lower lifetime medical costs ($82,344) compared with TIO ($88,822), open dual LAMA + LABA treatment ($114,442), and no long-acting bronchodilator ($86,751). Fewer exacerbations were predicted to occur with UMEC/VI treatment compared with no long-acting bronchodilator treatment. UMEC/VI provided an 0.11 and 0.25 increase in QALYs compared with TIO and no long-acting bronchodilator treatment, and as such, dominated these cost-effectiveness analyses. Sensitivity analyses confirmed that the results were robust. CONCLUSION: The results from this model suggest that UMEC/VI treatment would be dominant compared with TIO and no long-acting bronchodilator treatment, and less costly than open dual LAMA + LABA treatment in patients with moderate to very 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.

Cost-effectiveness and budget impact of the fixed-dose dual bronchodilator combination tiotropium-olodaterol for patients with COPD in the Netherlands.

PURPOSE: The fixed-dose dual bronchodilator combination (FDC) of tiotropium and olodaterol showed increased effectiveness regarding lung function and health-related quality of life in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) compared with the use of its mono-components. Yet, while effectiveness and safety have been shown, the health economic implication of this treatment is still unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-utility and budget impact of tiotropium-olodaterol FDC in patients with moderate to very severe COPD in the Netherlands. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A cost-utility study was performed, using an individual-level Markov model. To populate the model, individual patient-level data (age, height, sex, COPD duration, baseline forced expiratory volume in 1 second) were obtained from the tiotropium-olodaterol TOnado trial. In the model, forced expiratory volume in 1 second and patient-level data were extrapolated to utility and survival, and treatment with tiotropium-olodaterol FDC was compared with tiotropium. Cost-utility analysis was performed from the Dutch health care payer's perspective using a 15-year time horizon in the base-case analysis. The standard Dutch discount rates were applied (costs: 4.0%; effects: 1.5%). Both univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Budget impact was annually assessed over a 5-year time horizon, taking into account different levels of medication adherence. RESULTS: As a result of cost increases, combined with quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gains, results showed that tiotropium-olodaterol FDC had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €7,004/QALY. Without discounting, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €5,981/QALY. Results were robust in univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Budget impact was estimated at €4.3 million over 5 years assuming 100% medication adherence. Scenarios with 40%, 60%, and 80% adherence resulted in lower 5-year incremental cost increases of €1.7, €2.6, and €3.4 million, respectively. CONCLUSION: Tiotropium-olodaterol FDC can be considered a cost-effective treatment under current Dutch cost-effectiveness thresholds.

Development of an enhanced health-economic model and cost-effectiveness analysis of tiotropium + olodaterol Respimat® fixed-dose combination for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients in Italy.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of the fixed-dose combination (FDC) of tiotropium + olodaterol Respimat(®) FDC with tiotropium alone for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the Italian health care setting using a newly developed patient-level Markov model that reflects the current understanding of the disease. METHODS: While previously published models have largely been based around a cohort approach using a Markov structure and GOLD stage stratification, an individual-level Markov approach was selected for the new model. Using patient-level data from the twin TOnado trials assessing Tiotropium + olodaterol Respimat(®) FDC versus tiotropium, outcomes were modelled based on the trough forced expiratory volume (tFEV1) of over 1000 patients in each treatment arm, tracked individually at trial visits through the 52-week trial period, and after the trial period it was assumed to decline at a constant rate based on disease stage. Exacerbation risk was estimated based on a random-effects logistic regression analysis of exacerbations in UPLIFT. Mortality by age and disease stage was estimated from an analysis of TIOSPIR trial data. Cost of bronchodilators and other medications, routine management, and costs of treatment for moderate and severe exacerbations for the Italian setting were included. A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted over a 15-year time horizon from the perspective of the Italian National Health Service. RESULTS: Aggregating total costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for each treatment cohort over 15 years and comparing tiotropium + olodaterol Respimat(®) FDC with tiotropium alone, resulted in mean incremental costs per patient of €1167 and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €7518 per additional QALY with tiotropium + olodaterol Respimat(®) FDC. The lung function outcomes observed for tiotropium + olodaterol Respimat(®) FDC in TOnado drove the results in terms of slightly higher mean life-years (12.24 versus 12.07) exacerbation-free months (11.36 versus 11.32) per patient and slightly fewer moderate and severe exacerbations per patient-year (0.411 versus 0.415; 0.21 versus 0.24) versus tiotropium. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed tiotropium + olodaterol Respimat(®) FDC to be the more cost-effective treatment in 95.2% and 98.4% of 500 simulations at thresholds of €20,000 and €30,000 per QALY respectively. CONCLUSION: Tiotropium + olodaterol Respimat(®) FDC is a cost-effective bronchodilator in the maintenance treatment of COPD for the Italian health care system.

Cost-effectiveness of combination therapy umeclidinium/vilanterol versus tiotropium in symptomatic COPD Spanish patients.

PURPOSE: Umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) is a novel fixed dose combination of a long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonist (LAMA) and a long-acting beta 2 receptor antagonist (LABA) agent. This analysis evaluated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of UMEC/VI compared with tiotropium (TIO), from the Spanish National Health System (NHS) perspective. METHODS: A previously published linked equations cohort model based on the epidemiological longitudinal study ECLIPSE (Evaluation of COPD Longitudinally to Identify Predictive Surrogate End-points) was used. Patients included were COPD patients with a post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) ≤70% and the presence of respiratory symptoms measured with the modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale (modified Medical Research Council ≥2). Treatment effect, expressed as change in FEV1 from baseline, was estimated from a 24-week head-to-head phase III clinical trial comparing once-daily UMEC/VI with once-daily TIO and was assumed to last 52 weeks following treatment initiation (maximum duration of UMEC/VI clinical trials). Spanish utility values were derived from a published local observational study. Unitary health care costs (€2015) were obtained from local sources. A 3-year time horizon was selected, and 3% discount was applied to effects and costs. Results were expressed as cost/quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) was performed. RESULTS: UMEC/VI produced additional 0.03 QALY and €590 vs TIO, leading to an ICER of €21,475/QALY. According to PSA, the probability of UMEC/VI being cost-effective was 80.3% at a willingness-to-pay of €30,000/QALY. CONCLUSION: UMEC/VI could be considered as a cost-effective treatment alternative compared with TIO in symptomatic COPD patients from the Spanish NHS perspective.

Combined bronchodilators (tiotropium plus olodaterol) for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a respiratory disease characterized by a progressive decline in lung function, is considered to be a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Long-acting inhaled bronchodilators, such as long-acting ß2 agonists (LABAs) or long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs), are the cornerstone of maintenance therapy for patients with moderate-to-very-severe COPD. For patients not sufficiently controlled on a single long-acting bronchodilator, a combination of different bronchodilators has shown a significant increase in lung function. Tiotropium, a once-daily dosing LAMA, demonstrated sustained improvements in lung function as well as improved health-related quality of life, reduced exacerbations, and increased survival without altering the rate of decline in the mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) with fairly tolerable side effects. Olodaterol is a once-daily dosing LABA that has proven to be effective in improving lung function, reducing rescue medication use, and improving dyspnea and health-related quality of life, as well as improving exercise endurance with an acceptable safety profile. The combination of olodaterol and tiotropium provided additional improvements in lung function greater than monotherapy with each drug alone. Several well-designed randomized trials confirmed that the synergistic effect of both drugs in combination was able to improve lung function and health-related quality of life without a significant increase in adverse effects. The objective of this paper is to review available evidence on the clinical efficacy and safety of tiotropium, olodaterol, and their combination in patients with COPD.

Cost-Effectiveness of Glycopyrronium Bromide Compared with Tiotropium in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Sweden.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare the cost effectiveness of once-daily Seebri Breezhaler(®) (glycopyrronium bromide) 50 µg with Spiriva(®) (tiotropium bromide) 18 µg in the maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the Swedish setting. METHODS: A previously published COPD Markov model accounting for disease progression and treatment discontinuation was used. Disease progression included the annual decline in forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) and occurrence of any exacerbations. Efficacy in the model consisted of FEV1 improvement between baseline and 12 weeks and the annual risk ratio of having an exacerbation compared to placebo. These clinical efficacy inputs were derived from a 1-year head-to-head trial comparing glycopyrronium 50 µg to tiotropium 18 µg. Utility values and cost estimates were obtained from the literature. The base-case analysis was performed for a 3-year time horizon. Cost and effects were discounted with 3% in accordance to Swedish guidelines. Uncertainty was assessed by one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Glycopyrronium was found to be less costly and more effective than tiotropium in moderate to severe COPD patients with cost savings of 5197 Swedish kronor (€570, US$725) per patient over a 3-year time horizon. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that over 99% of the iterations produced dominant results for glycopyrronium. CONCLUSION: Glycopyrronium bromide 50 µg once daily can be considered a cost effective alternative to tiotropium bromide 18 µg once daily in the maintenance treatment of COPD patients in Sweden.