Blog
About

2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Correction to: 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

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Correction to: Respir Res https://doi.org/10.1186/s12931-018-0916-7 Following publication of the original article [1], we have been notified of the below corrections to the 5th paragraph in the Discussion section. Reference 24 needs to be amended to 25 The 12-week study needs to be corrected to 8-week study Corrected text: This study is the first to compare two LAMA/LABA dual therapies using direct head-to-head data from a randomized, 8-week study [25], which is the most reliable set of data to include within a cost-effectiveness model [25].

          Related collections

          Most cited references 1

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          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 β2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) treatments can be considered cost effective in Spain. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12931-018-0916-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
            Bookmark

            Author and article information

            Contributors
            yumiko.x.asukai@gsk.com
            Journal
            Respir Res
            Respir. Res
            Respiratory Research
            BioMed Central (London )
            1465-9921
            1465-993X
            28 January 2019
            28 January 2019
            2019
            : 20
            Affiliations
            [1 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2162 0389, GRID grid.418236.a, Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, ; 980 Great West Road, Brentford, Middlesex TW8 9GS UK
            [2 ]ICON Health Economics, ICON plc, Abingdon, UK
            [3 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1768 1287, GRID grid.419327.a, Departamento de Evaluación de Medicamentos, GSK, ; Tres Cantos, Madrid, Spain
            [4 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2162 0389, GRID grid.418236.a, Global Respiratory Franchise, GSK, ; Brentford, Middlesex UK
            [5 ]Hospital de Alta Resolución de Loja, Granada, Spain
            [6 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0675 8654, GRID grid.411083.f, Pneumology Department, Hospital Universitari Vall d’Hebron, ; Barcelona, Spain
            [7 ]ISNI 0000 0000 8970 9163, GRID grid.81821.32, Hospital Universitario La Paz-IdiPAZ, ; Madrid, Spain
            [8 ]ICON Health Economics, ICON, Toronto, ON Canada
            Article
            985
            10.1186/s12931-019-0985-2
            6348614
            © The Author(s). 2019

            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.

            Categories
            Correction
            Custom metadata
            © The Author(s) 2019

            Respiratory medicine

            Comments

            Comment on this article