Cost-effectiveness of single-inhaler triple therapy for patients with severe COPD: a systematic literature review

ABSTRACT

Introduction

Evidence from non-randomized studies shows benefits for single-inhaler users compared with multiple-inhaler users who receive the same medication. As a result, comparative cost-effectiveness studies are required to inform treatment decisions with an increasing choice of medications and devices for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study conducted a systematic literature review to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of using a single combination inhaler regimen for patients with severe COPD. This review also investigated the health impact on patients in different settings.

Areas covered

A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, EBSCO Host (including CINAHL and EconLit), Health Technology Assessment Database, National Institute for Health Research Economic Evaluation Database, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry and Google Scholar.

Expert opinion

Based on the primary findings of 13 included studies: (1) single-inhaler triple therapy was a cost-effective treatment option for patients with severe COPD, and (2) triple therapy also resulted in better health outcomes (reduced exacerbations, life-years gained) and increased QALYs for patients with severe COPD. Nonetheless, eleven out of the thirteen selected studies were funded by the pharmaceutical industry, and none were conducted in the least developed countries. Therefore, the results should be interpreted with caution.

KEYWORDS:

• COPD
• Cost-effectiveness
• single inhaler
• multiple inhalers
• systematic review

Declaration of interest

The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties

Reviewer Disclosures

A reviewer on this manuscript has disclosed that they have performed consulting, served on advisory boards, or received travel reimbursement from Amphastar, AstraZeneca, Chiesi, Connect Biopharma, GlaxoSmithKline, Mylan, Novartis, Sunovion and Theravance; and that they have conducted multicenter clinical research trials for more than 40 pharmaceutical companies. All remaining peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial or other relationships to disclose

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/17476348.2022.2145951

Notes

1. Mometasone with Indacaterol and Glycopyrronium

Additional information

Funding

This paper was not funded.