Cargando…

Cost-effectiveness of umeclidinium compared with tiotropium and glycopyrronium as monotherapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a UK perspective

BACKGROUND: Cost-effectiveness of once-daily umeclidinium bromide (UMEC) was compared with once-daily tiotropium (TIO) and once-daily glycopyrronium (GLY) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) from a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective. METHODS: A linked-equation mod...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shah, Dhvani, Driessen, Maurice, Risebrough, Nancy, Baker, Timothy, Naya, Ian, Briggs, Andrew, Ismaila, Afisi S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5946544/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29773969
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-018-0101-3
_version_ 1783322220556189696
author Shah, Dhvani
Driessen, Maurice
Risebrough, Nancy
Baker, Timothy
Naya, Ian
Briggs, Andrew
Ismaila, Afisi S.
author_facet Shah, Dhvani
Driessen, Maurice
Risebrough, Nancy
Baker, Timothy
Naya, Ian
Briggs, Andrew
Ismaila, Afisi S.
author_sort Shah, Dhvani
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Cost-effectiveness of once-daily umeclidinium bromide (UMEC) was compared with once-daily tiotropium (TIO) and once-daily glycopyrronium (GLY) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) from a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective. METHODS: A linked-equation model was implemented to estimate COPD progression, associated healthcare costs, exacerbations rates, life years (LY) and quality-adjusted LY (QALYs). Statistical risk equations for endpoints and resource use were derived from the ECLIPSE and TORCH studies, respectively. Treatment effects [mean (standard error)] at 12 weeks on forced expiratory volume in 1 s and St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire score were obtained from the intention-to-treat populations of two head-to-head studies [GSK study identifiers 201316 (NCT02207829) and 201315 (NCT02236611)] which compared UMEC 62.5 mcg with TIO 18 mcg and UMEC 62.5 mcg with GLY 50 mcg, respectively. Treatment costs reflect UK list prices (2016) and NHS unit costs; UMEC and GLY prices being equal and less than TIO. A lifetime horizon, discounted costs and effects at 3.5% were used. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of variations in input parameters and assumptions in the model. RESULTS: Over a lifetime horizon, UMEC was predicted to increase LYs (+ 0.195; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.069, 0.356) and QALYs (+ 0.118; 95% CI: 0.055, 0.191) and reduce the number of annual exacerbations (− 0.053; 95% CI: − 0.171, 0.028) compared with TIO, with incremental cost savings of £460/patient (95% CI: − £645, − £240). Compared with GLY, UMEC increased LYs (+ 0.124; 95% CI: 0.015, 0.281) and QALYs (+ 0.101; 95% CI: 0.043, 0.179) and reduced annual exacerbation (− 0.033; 95% CI: − 0.135, 0.017) at an additional cost of £132/patient (95% CI: £12, £330), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £1310/QALY (95% CI: £284, £2060). Similar results were observed in alternative time horizons and additional sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: For treatment of patients with COPD in the UK over a lifetime horizon, treatment with UMEC dominates treatment with TIO, providing both improved health outcomes and cost savings. In comparison with GLY, treatment with UMEC achieved improved health outcomes but was associated with a higher cost. Trial registration 201316, NCT02207829; 201315, NCT02236611 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12962-018-0101-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5946544
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59465442018-05-17 Cost-effectiveness of umeclidinium compared with tiotropium and glycopyrronium as monotherapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a UK perspective Shah, Dhvani Driessen, Maurice Risebrough, Nancy Baker, Timothy Naya, Ian Briggs, Andrew Ismaila, Afisi S. Cost Eff Resour Alloc Research BACKGROUND: Cost-effectiveness of once-daily umeclidinium bromide (UMEC) was compared with once-daily tiotropium (TIO) and once-daily glycopyrronium (GLY) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) from a UK National Health Service (NHS) perspective. METHODS: A linked-equation model was implemented to estimate COPD progression, associated healthcare costs, exacerbations rates, life years (LY) and quality-adjusted LY (QALYs). Statistical risk equations for endpoints and resource use were derived from the ECLIPSE and TORCH studies, respectively. Treatment effects [mean (standard error)] at 12 weeks on forced expiratory volume in 1 s and St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire score were obtained from the intention-to-treat populations of two head-to-head studies [GSK study identifiers 201316 (NCT02207829) and 201315 (NCT02236611)] which compared UMEC 62.5 mcg with TIO 18 mcg and UMEC 62.5 mcg with GLY 50 mcg, respectively. Treatment costs reflect UK list prices (2016) and NHS unit costs; UMEC and GLY prices being equal and less than TIO. A lifetime horizon, discounted costs and effects at 3.5% were used. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of variations in input parameters and assumptions in the model. RESULTS: Over a lifetime horizon, UMEC was predicted to increase LYs (+ 0.195; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.069, 0.356) and QALYs (+ 0.118; 95% CI: 0.055, 0.191) and reduce the number of annual exacerbations (− 0.053; 95% CI: − 0.171, 0.028) compared with TIO, with incremental cost savings of £460/patient (95% CI: − £645, − £240). Compared with GLY, UMEC increased LYs (+ 0.124; 95% CI: 0.015, 0.281) and QALYs (+ 0.101; 95% CI: 0.043, 0.179) and reduced annual exacerbation (− 0.033; 95% CI: − 0.135, 0.017) at an additional cost of £132/patient (95% CI: £12, £330), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £1310/QALY (95% CI: £284, £2060). Similar results were observed in alternative time horizons and additional sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: For treatment of patients with COPD in the UK over a lifetime horizon, treatment with UMEC dominates treatment with TIO, providing both improved health outcomes and cost savings. In comparison with GLY, treatment with UMEC achieved improved health outcomes but was associated with a higher cost. Trial registration 201316, NCT02207829; 201315, NCT02236611 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12962-018-0101-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-05-10 /pmc/articles/PMC5946544/ /pubmed/29773969 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-018-0101-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Shah, Dhvani
Driessen, Maurice
Risebrough, Nancy
Baker, Timothy
Naya, Ian
Briggs, Andrew
Ismaila, Afisi S.
Cost-effectiveness of umeclidinium compared with tiotropium and glycopyrronium as monotherapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a UK perspective
title Cost-effectiveness of umeclidinium compared with tiotropium and glycopyrronium as monotherapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a UK perspective
title_full Cost-effectiveness of umeclidinium compared with tiotropium and glycopyrronium as monotherapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a UK perspective
title_fullStr Cost-effectiveness of umeclidinium compared with tiotropium and glycopyrronium as monotherapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a UK perspective
title_full_unstemmed Cost-effectiveness of umeclidinium compared with tiotropium and glycopyrronium as monotherapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a UK perspective
title_short Cost-effectiveness of umeclidinium compared with tiotropium and glycopyrronium as monotherapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a UK perspective
title_sort cost-effectiveness of umeclidinium compared with tiotropium and glycopyrronium as monotherapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a uk perspective
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5946544/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29773969
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12962-018-0101-3
work_keys_str_mv AT shahdhvani costeffectivenessofumeclidiniumcomparedwithtiotropiumandglycopyrroniumasmonotherapyforchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaseaukperspective
AT driessenmaurice costeffectivenessofumeclidiniumcomparedwithtiotropiumandglycopyrroniumasmonotherapyforchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaseaukperspective
AT risebroughnancy costeffectivenessofumeclidiniumcomparedwithtiotropiumandglycopyrroniumasmonotherapyforchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaseaukperspective
AT bakertimothy costeffectivenessofumeclidiniumcomparedwithtiotropiumandglycopyrroniumasmonotherapyforchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaseaukperspective
AT nayaian costeffectivenessofumeclidiniumcomparedwithtiotropiumandglycopyrroniumasmonotherapyforchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaseaukperspective
AT briggsandrew costeffectivenessofumeclidiniumcomparedwithtiotropiumandglycopyrroniumasmonotherapyforchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaseaukperspective
AT ismailaafisis costeffectivenessofumeclidiniumcomparedwithtiotropiumandglycopyrroniumasmonotherapyforchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaseaukperspective