Cost-effectiveness analysis of fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium bromide/vilanterol and umeclidinium bromide/vilanterol in the management of moderate and severe COPD in China.

OBJECTIVE: A study has analyzed the long-term cost-effectiveness of fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium bromide/vilanterol combination therapy (FF/UMEC/VI) versus umeclidinium bromide/vilanterol dual therapy (UMEC/VI) in the treatment of moderate or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), providing evidence for decision-making in COPD treatment. METHODS: From the perspective of the whole society, a Markov model based on the severity of COPD was established, consisting of four states: moderate, severe, very severe, and death. The cycle of the model is three months, and the time frame of the study is 20 years. Data such as initial states, transition probabilities, costs, and utilities were collected from published literature, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) COPD economic report, Yaozh database, and the National Statistics Office. The discount rate is 5 %, and the willingness to pay threshold is set at three times the per capita GDP of China in 2022. TreeAge Pro 2011 was used to obtain the results of multiplication analyses, and one-way factor analysis and probability sensitivity analysis were conducted. RESULTS: The study findings demonstrate that for patients treated with FF/UMEC/VI and UMEC/VI, the 20-year treatment costs amount to $10,126.46 and $10,685.74, respectively. Similarly, the effectiveness is 32.94 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and 32.19 QALYs, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is $-745.70/QALY, which is lower than the willingness to pay threshold. The tornado plot from one-way factor analysis indicates that the first two factors impacting the results are the utility values for severe COPD of UMEC/VI and FF/UMEC/VI. Probability sensitivity analysis indicates that FF/UMEC/VI compared to UMEC/VI can be considered a more cost-effective treatment at the willingness to pay threshold of $35,806.96. CONCLUSION: The triple therapy (FF/UMEC/VI) is more affordable than dual therapy (UMEC/VI) when compared to China's three times GDP per capita criterion.

Broncodilatadores en bronquiolitis: ¿debemos replantearnos su uso selectivo? / Bronchodilators in bronchiolitis: should we reassess their selective use?

Conclusiones de los autores del estudio: en comparación con el manejo según recomendaciones de las guías actuales, el tratamiento de lactantes con bronquiolitis aguda utilizando la estrategia de terapia broncodilatadora guiada por fenotipos es una estrategia más rentable. Implica una menor probabilidad de ingreso hospitalario a costos totales más bajos. Se deben realizar ensayos controlados aleatorizados utilizando biomarcadores para estratificar a los pacientes con más probabilidades de responder a los broncodilatadores.Comentario de los revisores: la información disponible no parece suficiente para realizar cambios en las recomendaciones actuales en el manejo de la bronquiolitis aguda. Seguimos necesitando un modelo predictivo que permita identificar a los potenciales respondedores a broncodilatadores, así como un ensayo clínico con suficiente tamaño muestral que estime la eficacia de la estrategia de su uso selectivo. (AU)

Authors’ conclusions: compared to guidelines‐guided strategy, treating infants with viral bronchiolitis using the phenotypic‐guided bronchodilator therapy strategy is a more cost‐effective strategy, because it involves a lower probability of hospital admission at lower total treatment costs. Randomized controlled trials using biomarkers to stratify patients most likely to respond to bronchodilators are necessary.Reviewers’ commentary: the available information does not seem sufficient to make changes to the current recommendations in acute bronchiolitis management. There is still need for a predictive model that allows to identify potential responders to bronchodilators, as well as a clinical trial with a sufficient sample size to estimate the effectiveness of the strategy of its selective use. (AU)

Stepping down asthma treatment.

Overview of: Bloom CL, de Preux L, Sheikh A et al Health and cost impact of stepping down asthma medication for UK patients, 2001-2017: a population-based observational study. PLOS Med 2020;17:e1003145.

The cost-utility of intravenous magnesium sulfate for treating asthma exacerbations in children.

INTRODUCTION: Although evidence supports the use of intravenous magnesium sulfate (MS) in asthma exacerbations, MS continues to be considered a second-line drug for managing pediatric asthma exacerbations. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-utility of MS in asthma exacerbations. METHODS: We used a decision tree model to estimate the cost-utility of MS compared to treatment without MS (control group) in children with asthma exacerbations. Cost data were obtained from a retrospective study from tertiary centers in Rionegro, Colombia, while utilities were collected from the literature. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was carried out using the Monte Carlo technique with a simulation of a hypothetical cohort of 10 000 patients to generate expected cost utilities with 95% confidence intervals. We used a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve to evaluate the uncertainty surrounding the cost-utility of MS. RESULTS: The model showed that MS had a lower total cost than the control group (US $1149 vs US $1598 average cost per patient) and higher quality-adjusted life years (0.60 vs 0.52 average per patient), showing dominance. The probability that MS provides a more cost-effective use of resources compared with standard therapy exceeds 99% for all willingness-to-pay thresholds. CONCLUSION: Intravenous MS was less expensive and more effective than treatment without intravenous MS in children with asthma exacerbations. Our study provides evidence that should be used by decision-makers to improve clinical practice guidelines and should be replicated to validate its results in other middle-income countries.

The cost-saving switch from inhaled corticosteroid-containing treatments to dual bronchodilation: a two-country projection of epidemiological and economic burden in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

PURPOSE: The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) 2018 recommendations support maintenance treatment with long-acting bronchodilators in most symptomatic patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). While restricting the overuse of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) may influence healthcare utilization required to treat inadvertent respiratory (exacerbations and pneumonia) and diabetes-related events, it may also change the total medication cost. This analysis was performed to estimate the 5-year budget impact of switching from ICS-containing treatment combinations to dual bronchodilation, in line with the recommendations. METHODS: The model quantified the budget impact of treatment and healthcare resource utilization when COPD patients were anticipated to switch from ICS-containing treatments to dual bronchodilation. Three switch scenarios were calculated with increasing proportions of patients on dual long-acting bronchodilators, to the detriment of ICS-containing double and triple combinations. Clinical and cost input data were based on results from clinical trials and Greek and Portuguese healthcare cost databases. RESULTS: Healthcare resource use to manage exacerbations, pneumonia and diabetes-related events were projected to increase between 2019 and 2023 in parallel with the growing COPD patient population and associated costs were estimated at 52-57% of the total disease cost in the Greek and Portuguese base case scenarios. Total cost savings between 21 and 112 million EUR were projected when the proportion of patients on double and triple ICS-containing treatments was gradually reduced to 50% in scenario A, 20% in scenario B and 7% in scenario C. Sensitivity analyses showed that none of the model assumptions had a major impact on the projected savings. CONCLUSION: The alignment of COPD treatment with current recommendations may bring clinical benefits to patients, without substantial cost increases and even cost savings for payers. The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

The impact of budesonide inhalation suspension for asthma hospitalization: In terms of length of stay, recovery time from symptoms, and hospitalization costs.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalization is a major cause of medical expenditure for asthma. Budesonide inhalation suspension (BIS) may assist in reducing asthma-related symptoms in severe asthma exacerbation. However, its effectiveness for hospitalized patients remains poorly known. The objective of this study is to determine associations of BIS with asthma hospitalization. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 98 patients who were admitted to our hospital due to severe asthma exacerbation (24 treated with BIS in combination with procaterol) from April 2014 to January 2019. Length of stay, recovery time from symptoms (wheezes), and hospitalization costs were compared between the 2 groups according to clinical factors including the use of BIS and sings of respiratory infections (i.e. C-reactive protein, the presence of phlegm, and the use of antibiotics). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to determine factors contributing to hospitalization outcomes. RESULTS: The use of BIS was associated with shorter length of stay, faster recovery time from symptoms, and more reduced hospitalization costs (6.0 vs 8.5 days, 2.5 vs 5.0 days, and 258,260 vs 343,350 JPY). Signs of respiratory infection were also associated with hospitalization outcomes. On a multivariate regression analysis, the use of BIS was a determinant of shortened length of stay and reduced symptoms and medical costs for asthma hospitalization along with signs of respiratory infection. CONCLUSIONS: BIS may contribute to shorten length of hospital stay and to reduce symptoms and medical expenditure irrespective of the presence or absence of respiratory infection.

Impact of a change of bronchodilator medications in a hospital drug formulary on intra- and out-of-hospital drug prescriptions: interrupted time series design with comparison group.

BACKGROUND: Hospital drug formularies are reduced lists of drugs designed to optimise inpatient care. Adherence to the drugs included in such formularies is not always 100% but is generally very high. Little research has targeted the impact of a change in these formularies on outpatient drug prescriptions. This study therefore sought to evaluate the impact of a change affecting bronchodilator medications in a hospital drug formulary on intra- and out-of-hospital drug prescriptions in a region in north-western Spain. Two new drugs belonging to this same class were brought onto the out-of-hospital market, overlapping with the intervention. METHODS: We used a natural before-after quasi-experimental design with control group based on monthly data. The intervention evaluated was the modification of a hospital drug formulary, which involved withdrawing salmeterol/fluticasone in order to retain formoterol/budesonide as the sole inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta-agonist (ICS/LABA). Using official data sources, we extracted the following dependent variables: defined daily doses (DDD) per 1000 inhabitants per day, DDD per 100 bed-days, and cost per DDD. RESULTS: Intra-hospital use showed a 173.2% rise (95% CI 47.3-299.0%) in the medication retained in the formulary, formoterol/budesonide, and a 94.9% drop (95% CI 77.9-111.9%) in the medication withdrawn from the formulary, salmeterol/fluticasone. This intervention led to an immediate reduction of 75.9% (95% CI 82.8-68.9%) in the intra-hospital cost per DDD of ICS/LABA. No significant changes were observed in out-of-hospital use. CONCLUSIONS: Although this intervention was cost-effective in the intra-hospital setting, the out-of-hospital impact of a change in the drug formulary cannot be generalised to all types of medications and situations.

Impact of Single Combination Inhaler versus Multiple Inhalers to Deliver the Same Medications for Patients with Asthma or COPD: A Systematic Literature Review.

With increasing choice of medications and devices for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treatment, comparative evidence may inform treatment decisions. This systematic literature review assessed clinical and economic evidence for using a single combination inhaler versus multiple inhalers to deliver the same medication for patients with asthma or COPD. In 2016, Embase, PubMed and the Cochrane library were searched for publications reporting studies in asthma or COPD comparing a single-inhaler combination medicine with multiple inhalers delivering the same medication. Publications included English-language articles published since 1996 and congress abstracts since 2013. Clinical, economic and adherence endpoints were assessed. Of 2031 abstracts screened, 18 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in asthma and four in COPD, nine retrospective and three prospective observational studies in asthma, and four observational studies in COPD were identified. Of these, five retrospective and one prospective study in asthma, and two retrospective studies in COPD reported greater adherence with a single inhaler than multiple inhalers. Nine observational studies reported significantly (n=7) or numerically (n=2) higher rates of adherence with single- versus multiple-inhaler therapy. Economic analyses from retrospective and prospective studies showed that use of single-inhaler therapies was associated with reduced healthcare resource use (n=6) and was cost-effective (n=5) compared with multiple-inhaler therapies. Findings in 18 asthma RCTs and one prospective study reporting lung function, and six RCTs reporting exacerbation rates, showed no significant differences between a single inhaler and multiple inhalers. This was in contrast to several observational studies reporting reductions in healthcare resource use or exacerbation events with single-inhaler treatment, compared with multiple inhalers. Retrospective and prospective studies showed that single-inhaler use was associated with decreased healthcare resource utilization and improved cost-effectiveness compared with multiple inhalers. Lung function and exacerbation rates were mostly comparable in the RCTs, possibly due to study design.

Metered-dose inhalers vs nebulization for the delivery of albuterol in pediatric asthma exacerbations: A cost-effectiveness analysis in a middle-income country.

OBJECTIVES: Although the benefits of albuterol delivered via metered-dose inhalers with a spacer (MDI+S) have been increasingly recognized, the evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of MDI+S compared to nebulization (NEB) is not sufficient, especially in less-affluent countries, where the clinical and economic burden of the disease is the greatest. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of MDI+S vs NEB for delivering albuterol for the treatment of pediatric asthma exacerbations. METHODS: A decision-analysis model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of MDI+S vs NEB for delivering albuterol for the treatment of pediatric asthma exacerbations. Effectiveness parameters were obtained from a systematic review of the literature. Cost data were obtained from hospital bills and from the national manual of drug prices in Colombia. The study was carried out from the perspective of the national healthcare system in Colombia, a middle-income country (MIC). The main outcome of the model was the avoidance of hospital admission. RESULTS: For the base-case analysis, the model showed that compared to NEB, using MDI+S for the delivery of albuterol was associated with lower total costs (US$96.68 vs US$121.41 average cost per patient) and a higher probability of hospital admission avoided (0.9219 vs 0.8900), thus leading to dominance. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that in Colombia, an MIC, compared with NEB, the use of MDI+S for delivering albuterol for the treatment of pediatric asthma exacerbations is the preferred strategy because it is associated with a lower probability of hospital admission at lower total treatment costs.

Cost-consequence analysis of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol for asthma management in Spain: an analysis based on the Salford Lung Study in asthma.

OBJECTIVES: The Salford Lung Study in asthma (SLS asthma) is a 12-month, open-label randomised clinical trial comparing clinical effectiveness of initiating once-daily inhaled combination of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI) 184/22 mcg or 92/22 mcg, with continuing optimized usual care (UC) with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) alone, or in combination with a long-acting ß2-agonist (ICS/LABA), in asthmatic patients followed in primary care in the UK. The objective of the analysis is to estimate the economic impact of these results when applied in Spain. METHODS: A 1-year cost-consequence model was populated with SLS asthma, adopting the Spanish National Health System (NHS) perspective. 775,900 of diagnosed asthmatic patients ≥ 18 years old currently managed with UC in Spain were included in the analysis. Effectiveness data included the percentage of patients per Asthma Control Test (ACT) category at 24 and 52 weeks from SLS asthma. Direct costs (pharmacological and per ACT category) were estimated from Spanish public sources and literature (€, 2018). Base case analysis assumed an increased use of FF/VI from 10 to 20% within 1 year. One-way sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Within the 775,900 asthmatic patients analysed, substitution of UC with FF/VI was associated with reduced costs due to ACT improvement, leading to potential total annual savings of €4,927,672. Sensitivity analyses ranged from €6,012,975 to €14,783,015 cost savings associated with FF/VI. An analysis considering patients only on ICS/LABA showed potential cost savings of €8,207,448. CONCLUSIONS: The improved asthma control for FF/VI compared with UC observed in SLS asthma could be translated into potential savings for the Spanish NHS. These results may be useful for decision makers.

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.

Prescription Status and Clinical Outcomes of Methylxanthines and Leukotriene Receptor Antagonists in Mild-to-Moderate Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Background: Methylxanthines and leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA) are not a first-line medical treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) but are frequently prescribed despite limited evidence. We aimed to elucidate the real prescribing status and clinical impacts of these agents in early COPD patients. Methods: Patients with mild-to-moderate COPD (FEV1>50%) were selected from the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data between 2007 and 2012. Besides analyzing the prescription status of methylxanthines and LTRA and the contributing factors to the prescription, we evaluated the clinical impacts of these drugs on the exacerbation, hospitalization, and medical costs. Results: Of 2269 patients with mild-to-moderate COPD, 378 patients (16.7%) were under medical treatments, and the users of methylxanthines and/or LTRA were 279 patients (12.3%); however, only 139 patients (6.1%) were inhaler users. The contributing factors for the prescription of methylxanthines were a comorbidity of asthma or allergic disease, poor lung function, low quality of life, prescribing doctor from the specialty of internal medicine, and an institution type of private hospital. The prescription of LTRA was associated with the comorbidity of allergic disease. The methylxanthine and/or LTRA users had more hospital utilization but did not have significant differences in acute exacerbations and medical cost for hospital utilization, compared with the non-users. Conclusion: Methylxanthines and LTRA were used in a significant proportion of patients with mild-to-moderate COPD in real fields without favorable impacts on the exacerbations, hospitalizations, or medical costs. The use of more effective inhaled medications should be encouraged.

Cost-Effectiveness Of Once-Daily Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy In COPD: The IMPACT Trial.

Background: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of single-inhaler fluticasone furoate (FF)/umeclidinium (UMEC)/vilanterol (VI) versus FF/VI or UMEC/VI from a Canadian public healthcare perspective, incorporating data from the IMPACT trial in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (NCT02164513). Methods: Baseline inputs and treatment effects from IMPACT were populated into the validated GALAXY-COPD disease progression model. Canadian unit costs and drug costs (Canadian dollars [C$], 2017) were applied to healthcare resource utilization and treatments. Future costs and health outcomes were discounted at 1.5% annually. Analyses were probabilistic, and outputs included exacerbation rates, costs, and life years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. Results: Compared with FF/VI and UMEC/VI over a lifetime horizon, the analyses predicted that treatment with FF/UMEC/VI resulted in fewer moderate and severe exacerbations, more LYs and more QALYs gained, with a small incremental cost. The base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per QALY gained was C$18,989 (95% confidence interval [CI]: C$14,665, C$25,753) versus FF/VI and C$13,776 (95% CI: C$9787, C$19,448) versus UMEC/VI. FF/UMEC/VI remained cost-effective versus both FF/VI and UMEC/VI in all sensitivity analyses, including in scenario analyses that considered different intervention and comparator discontinuation rates, and treatment effects for subsequent therapy. Conclusion: Treatment with FF/UMEC/VI was predicted to improve outcomes and be a cost-effective treatment option for patients with symptomatic COPD and a history of exacerbations compared with FF/VI or UMEC/VI, in Canada.

Dual versus triple therapy in patients hospitalized for COPD in France: a claims data study.

Purposes: Following a hospitalization for COPD, dual and triple therapies were compared in terms of persistence and relations with outcomes (exacerbations, health care resource use and costs). Methods: This was a historical observational database study. All patients aged ≥45 hospitalized for COPD between 2007 and 2015 were identified in a 1/97th random sample of French claims data. Patients receiving dual therapy within 60 days after hospitalization were compared to patients receiving triple therapy, after propensity score matching on disease severity. Results: Of the 3,089 patients hospitalized for COPD, 1,538 (49.8%) received either dual or triple therapy in the 2 months following inclusion, and 1,500 (48.6%) had at least 30 days of follow-up available; 846 (27.4%) received dual therapy, and 654 (21.2%) received triple therapy. After matching, the number of exacerbations was 2.4 per year in the dual vs 2.3 in the triple group (p=0.45). Among newly treated patients (n=206), persistence at 12 months was similar in the dual and triple groups (48% vs 41%, respectively, p=0.37). As compared to patients on dual therapy, more patients on triple therapy received oral corticosteroids (49.1 vs 40.4%, p=0.003) or were hospitalized for any reason (67% vs 55.8%, p=0.0001) or for COPD (35.3 vs 25.1%, p=0.0002) during follow-up. Cost of care was higher for patients on triple than for those on dual therapy (€11,877.1 vs €9,825.1, p=0.01). Conclusion: Following hospitalizations for COPD, patients on dual and triple therapy experienced recurrent exacerbations, limited adherence to therapies and high cost of care. Patients on triple therapy appeared more severe than those on dual therapy, as reflected by exacerbations and health care resource use.

Economic impact of delaying initiation with multiple-inhaler maintenance triple therapy in Spanish patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Purpose: Guidelines recommend the use of triple therapy with an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), a long-acting ß2 agonist (LABA) and a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) to reduce the risk of future exacerbations in symptomatic COPD patients with a history of exacerbations. This study aimed to estimate COPD-related healthcare resource use and costs, and subsequent exacerbation rates, for patients initiating multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT) early (≤30 days) versus late (31-180 days) following an exacerbation, in a real-world clinical setting. Patients and methods: This was an observational, longitudinal, retrospective study using electronic medical records from the Spanish database of the Red de Investigación en Servicios Sanitarios Foundation. Patients ≥40 years old with a confirmed COPD diagnosis who were newly prescribed MITT up to 180 days after an exacerbation between January 2013 and December 2015 were included. Patients were followed from the date of MITT initiation for up to 12 months to assess COPD-related health care resource use (routine and emergency visits, hospitalizations, pharmacologic treatment), exacerbation rate, and costs (€2017); these endpoints were compared between early versus late groups. Results: The study included 1280 patients who met selection criteria: mean age 73 years, 78% male, and 41% had severe/very severe lung function impairment. The proportion of patients initiating MITT early versus late was 61.6% versus 38.4%, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics between groups. During follow-up, health care resource consumption was lower in the early versus late group, especially primary care and ED visits, leading to lower total costs (€1861 versus €1935; P<0.05). In the follow-up period, 28.0% of the patients in the early group experienced ≥1 exacerbation versus 36.4% in the late group (P=0.002), with an exacerbation rate of 0.5 versus 0.6 per person per year (P=0.022), respectively. Conclusion: Initiating MITT early (≤30 days after an exacerbation) may reduce health care costs and exacerbation rate compared with late MITT initiation.

Trends in prescriptions and costs of inhaled medications in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a 19-year population-based study from Canada.

Background: The patterns of medication use in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may change over time due to the availability of new medications, updates in guideline-based recommendations, and changes in patient and care provider preferences. Objectives: To document population-level trends of filled prescriptions and costs for major classes of inhaled COPD therapies. Method: We used administrative health databases of the province of British Columbia, Canada, from 1997 to 2015, to create a retrospective cohort of COPD patients. We documented the percentage of patients receiving major inhaled COPD-related medications, including short-acting beta-2 adrenoreceptor agonists (SABA), long-acting beta-2 adrenoreceptor agonists (LABA), inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), short-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (SAMA), and long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMA). We quantified the average, and relative annual change in, dispensed quantities and costs (in 2015 Canadian dollars [$]) of medications. Combination therapy was assessed as the proportion of time covered by two or more long-acting medications of different classes. Results: A total of 176,338 patients were included in the final cohort (mean age at entry 68.7, 48.5% female). In 2015, the most common medication was ICS (45.7% of the patients), followed by LABA (36.5%). LAMA was the least used medication (18.9%). The number of filled prescriptions per patient per year for LAMA (+7.8% per year) and LABA (+4.9%) increased, while they decreased for SAMA (-6.3%) and SABA (-3.8%), and remained relatively constant for ICS. The average annual per-patient costs of inhaled medications were $570.8 in 2015, which was double the costs from 1997. Single-inhaler ICS/LABA had the highest rate of increase (11.6% per year), and comprised 53.7% of the total costs of inhalers in 2015. In 2015, 28.5% of the patient time was on combination therapies, with 7.1% on triple ICS/LABA/LAMA therapy. Conclusion: Utilization of inhaled therapies for COPD has changed significantly over time. The low utilization of LAMA and high utilization of combination therapies (particularly those containing ICS) do not seem to be aligned with COPD treatment guidelines.