Cargando…
Cost-Effectiveness of Single- versus Multiple-Inhaler Triple Therapy in a UK COPD Population: The INTREPID Trial
PURPOSE: The 24-week INTREPID trial demonstrated the clinical benefits of once-daily single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) with fluticasone furoate, umeclidinium, and vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) versus non-ELLIPTA multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT) in patients with symptomatic chronic obstructive pul...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9617516/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36317185 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S370577 |
_version_ | 1784820859618197504 |
---|---|
author | Halpin, David M G Kendall, Robyn Shukla, Soham Martin, Alan Shah, Dhvani Midwinter, Dawn Beeh, Kai M Kocks, Janwillem W H Jones, Paul W Compton, Chris Risebrough, Nancy A Ismaila, Afisi S |
author_facet | Halpin, David M G Kendall, Robyn Shukla, Soham Martin, Alan Shah, Dhvani Midwinter, Dawn Beeh, Kai M Kocks, Janwillem W H Jones, Paul W Compton, Chris Risebrough, Nancy A Ismaila, Afisi S |
author_sort | Halpin, David M G |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: The 24-week INTREPID trial demonstrated the clinical benefits of once-daily single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) with fluticasone furoate, umeclidinium, and vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) versus non-ELLIPTA multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT) in patients with symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This analysis assessed the cost-effectiveness of FF/UMEC/VI versus non-ELLIPTA MITT for the treatment of symptomatic COPD from a United Kingdom (UK) National Health Service (NHS) perspective. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The analysis was conducted using the validated GALAXY COPD disease progression model. Baseline characteristics, treatment effect parameters (forced expiratory volume in 1 second and St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire score [derived from exploratory COPD Assessment Test score mapping]), and discontinuation data from INTREPID were used to populate the model. UK healthcare resource and drug costs (2020 British pounds) were applied, and costs and outcomes were discounted at 3.5%. Analyses were conducted over a lifetime horizon from a UK NHS perspective. Model outputs included exacerbation rates, total costs, life years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per QALY. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the results by varying parameter values and assumptions. RESULTS: Over a lifetime horizon, FF/UMEC/VI provided an additional 0.174 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.024, 0.344) LYs (approximately 2 months), and 0.253 (95% CI: 0.167, 0.346) QALYs (approximately 3 months), at a cost saving of £1764 (95% CI: −£2600, −£678) per patient, compared with non-ELLIPTA MITT. FF/UMEC/VI remained the dominant treatment option, meaning greater benefits at lower costs, across all scenario and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Based on this analysis, in a UK setting, FF/UMEC/VI would improve health outcomes and reduce costs compared with non-ELLIPTA MITT for the treatment of patients with symptomatic COPD. SITT may help to reduce the clinical and economic burden of COPD and should be considered by physicians as a preferred treatment option. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9617516 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Dove |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96175162022-10-30 Cost-Effectiveness of Single- versus Multiple-Inhaler Triple Therapy in a UK COPD Population: The INTREPID Trial Halpin, David M G Kendall, Robyn Shukla, Soham Martin, Alan Shah, Dhvani Midwinter, Dawn Beeh, Kai M Kocks, Janwillem W H Jones, Paul W Compton, Chris Risebrough, Nancy A Ismaila, Afisi S Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis Original Research PURPOSE: The 24-week INTREPID trial demonstrated the clinical benefits of once-daily single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) with fluticasone furoate, umeclidinium, and vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) versus non-ELLIPTA multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT) in patients with symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This analysis assessed the cost-effectiveness of FF/UMEC/VI versus non-ELLIPTA MITT for the treatment of symptomatic COPD from a United Kingdom (UK) National Health Service (NHS) perspective. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The analysis was conducted using the validated GALAXY COPD disease progression model. Baseline characteristics, treatment effect parameters (forced expiratory volume in 1 second and St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire score [derived from exploratory COPD Assessment Test score mapping]), and discontinuation data from INTREPID were used to populate the model. UK healthcare resource and drug costs (2020 British pounds) were applied, and costs and outcomes were discounted at 3.5%. Analyses were conducted over a lifetime horizon from a UK NHS perspective. Model outputs included exacerbation rates, total costs, life years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per QALY. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the results by varying parameter values and assumptions. RESULTS: Over a lifetime horizon, FF/UMEC/VI provided an additional 0.174 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.024, 0.344) LYs (approximately 2 months), and 0.253 (95% CI: 0.167, 0.346) QALYs (approximately 3 months), at a cost saving of £1764 (95% CI: −£2600, −£678) per patient, compared with non-ELLIPTA MITT. FF/UMEC/VI remained the dominant treatment option, meaning greater benefits at lower costs, across all scenario and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Based on this analysis, in a UK setting, FF/UMEC/VI would improve health outcomes and reduce costs compared with non-ELLIPTA MITT for the treatment of patients with symptomatic COPD. SITT may help to reduce the clinical and economic burden of COPD and should be considered by physicians as a preferred treatment option. Dove 2022-10-25 /pmc/articles/PMC9617516/ /pubmed/36317185 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S370577 Text en © 2022 Halpin et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) ). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php). |
spellingShingle | Original Research Halpin, David M G Kendall, Robyn Shukla, Soham Martin, Alan Shah, Dhvani Midwinter, Dawn Beeh, Kai M Kocks, Janwillem W H Jones, Paul W Compton, Chris Risebrough, Nancy A Ismaila, Afisi S Cost-Effectiveness of Single- versus Multiple-Inhaler Triple Therapy in a UK COPD Population: The INTREPID Trial |
title | Cost-Effectiveness of Single- versus Multiple-Inhaler Triple Therapy in a UK COPD Population: The INTREPID Trial |
title_full | Cost-Effectiveness of Single- versus Multiple-Inhaler Triple Therapy in a UK COPD Population: The INTREPID Trial |
title_fullStr | Cost-Effectiveness of Single- versus Multiple-Inhaler Triple Therapy in a UK COPD Population: The INTREPID Trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Cost-Effectiveness of Single- versus Multiple-Inhaler Triple Therapy in a UK COPD Population: The INTREPID Trial |
title_short | Cost-Effectiveness of Single- versus Multiple-Inhaler Triple Therapy in a UK COPD Population: The INTREPID Trial |
title_sort | cost-effectiveness of single- versus multiple-inhaler triple therapy in a uk copd population: the intrepid trial |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9617516/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36317185 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S370577 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT halpindavidmg costeffectivenessofsingleversusmultipleinhalertripletherapyinaukcopdpopulationtheintrepidtrial AT kendallrobyn costeffectivenessofsingleversusmultipleinhalertripletherapyinaukcopdpopulationtheintrepidtrial AT shuklasoham costeffectivenessofsingleversusmultipleinhalertripletherapyinaukcopdpopulationtheintrepidtrial AT martinalan costeffectivenessofsingleversusmultipleinhalertripletherapyinaukcopdpopulationtheintrepidtrial AT shahdhvani costeffectivenessofsingleversusmultipleinhalertripletherapyinaukcopdpopulationtheintrepidtrial AT midwinterdawn costeffectivenessofsingleversusmultipleinhalertripletherapyinaukcopdpopulationtheintrepidtrial AT beehkaim costeffectivenessofsingleversusmultipleinhalertripletherapyinaukcopdpopulationtheintrepidtrial AT kocksjanwillemwh costeffectivenessofsingleversusmultipleinhalertripletherapyinaukcopdpopulationtheintrepidtrial AT jonespaulw costeffectivenessofsingleversusmultipleinhalertripletherapyinaukcopdpopulationtheintrepidtrial AT comptonchris costeffectivenessofsingleversusmultipleinhalertripletherapyinaukcopdpopulationtheintrepidtrial AT risebroughnancya costeffectivenessofsingleversusmultipleinhalertripletherapyinaukcopdpopulationtheintrepidtrial AT ismailaafisis costeffectivenessofsingleversusmultipleinhalertripletherapyinaukcopdpopulationtheintrepidtrial |