Single versus multiple inhaler triple therapy in COPD using data from the pragmatic INTREPID trial: cost-effectiveness analysis from the Chilean public healthcare system perspective.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Felipe Moraes Dos Santos, Nicolás Sandoval Astudillo, Manuel Espinoza, Carlos Balmaceda, Jose Fernando Romero, Stephen G Noorduyn
{"title":"Single versus multiple inhaler triple therapy in COPD using data from the pragmatic INTREPID trial: cost-effectiveness analysis from the Chilean public healthcare system perspective.","authors":"Felipe Moraes Dos Santos, Nicolás Sandoval Astudillo, Manuel Espinoza, Carlos Balmaceda, Jose Fernando Romero, Stephen G Noorduyn","doi":"10.1080/14737167.2026.2693168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) imposes a substantial economic burden in Chile. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of fluticasone furoate, umeclidinium, and vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) once daily via single inhaler compared to multiple inhaler triple therapy (MITT) for moderate to severe COPD, from the Chilean public healthcare system perspective.</p><p><strong>Research design and methods: </strong>The Galaxy COPD disease progression model was adapted to the Chilean setting, incorporating Chilean healthcare resource use and unit costs, along with patient data, comparators, and treatment effects from INTREPID trial. Costs and healthcare benefits were aggregated over 25 years and reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs-cost/quality-adjusted life year [QALY] gained). Sensitivity analysis included probabilistic assessment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Single inhaler FF/UMEC/VI provided an additional 0.261 QALYs at an incremental cost of 114.21 United States Dollars (USD) per patient, leading to an ICER of 438.41 USD/QALY in the base case. FF/UMEC/VI reduced severe exacerbations per patient per year by 4.38% compared to MITT. FF/UMEC/VI was dominant over MITT in 5- and 10-year time horizons.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite higher total costs due to increased drug acquisition, FF/UMEC/VI reduces healthcare resource utilization associated with COPD events, representing a cost-effective option compared to MITT for moderate to severe COPD in Chile.</p>","PeriodicalId":12244,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2026.2693168","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) imposes a substantial economic burden in Chile. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of fluticasone furoate, umeclidinium, and vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) once daily via single inhaler compared to multiple inhaler triple therapy (MITT) for moderate to severe COPD, from the Chilean public healthcare system perspective.

Research design and methods: The Galaxy COPD disease progression model was adapted to the Chilean setting, incorporating Chilean healthcare resource use and unit costs, along with patient data, comparators, and treatment effects from INTREPID trial. Costs and healthcare benefits were aggregated over 25 years and reported as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs-cost/quality-adjusted life year [QALY] gained). Sensitivity analysis included probabilistic assessment.

Results: Single inhaler FF/UMEC/VI provided an additional 0.261 QALYs at an incremental cost of 114.21 United States Dollars (USD) per patient, leading to an ICER of 438.41 USD/QALY in the base case. FF/UMEC/VI reduced severe exacerbations per patient per year by 4.38% compared to MITT. FF/UMEC/VI was dominant over MITT in 5- and 10-year time horizons.

Conclusions: Despite higher total costs due to increased drug acquisition, FF/UMEC/VI reduces healthcare resource utilization associated with COPD events, representing a cost-effective option compared to MITT for moderate to severe COPD in Chile.

使用实用INTREPID试验数据的单吸入器与多吸入器三联治疗COPD:从智利公共卫生系统的角度进行成本-效果分析
背景:慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)在智利造成了巨大的经济负担。本研究从智利公共卫生系统的角度评估了糠酸氟替卡松、乌莫利维坦和维兰特罗(FF/UMEC/VI)每日一次单吸入器与多吸入器三合一治疗(MITT)治疗中重度COPD的成本效益。研究设计和方法:Galaxy COPD疾病进展模型适应智利环境,纳入智利医疗资源使用和单位成本,以及来自INTREPID试验的患者数据、比较物和治疗效果。成本和医疗保健福利合计超过25年,并以增量成本效益比(ICERs -获得的成本/质量调整生命年[QALY])报告。敏感性分析包括概率评估。结果:单个吸入器FF/UMEC/VI以每位患者114.21美元的增量成本提供了额外的0.261个QALY,导致基本病例的ICER为438.41美元/QALY。与MITT相比,FF/UMEC/VI每年减少每位患者严重恶化4.38%。在5年和10年的时间范围内,FF/UMEC/VI优于MITT。结论:尽管药物获取增加导致总成本增加,但FF/UMEC/VI降低了与COPD事件相关的医疗资源利用率,在智利,与MITT相比,对于中重度COPD是一种具有成本效益的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.30%
发文量
68
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research (ISSN 1473-7167) provides expert reviews on cost-benefit and pharmacoeconomic issues relating to the clinical use of drugs and therapeutic approaches. Coverage includes pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life research, therapeutic outcomes, evidence-based medicine and cost-benefit research. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review. The journal adopts the unique Expert Review article format, offering a complete overview of current thinking in a key technology area, research or clinical practice, augmented by the following sections: Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书