Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28392684›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2017

Cost-effectiveness analysis of umeclidinium/vilanterol for the management of patients with moderate to very severe COPD using an economic model.

Michele R Wilson, Jeetvan G Patel, Amber Coleman, Cheryl L McDade, Richard H Stanford, Stephanie R Earnshaw

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Early COPD diagnosis and treatment: A case report.Respiratory medicine case reports · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Evidence-based review of data on the combination inhaler umeclidinium/vilanterol in patients with COPD.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2019
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michele R WilsonRTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Jeetvan G PatelGSK, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA; Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
Amber ColemanGSK, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Cheryl L McDadeRTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Richard H StanfordGSK, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
Stephanie R EarnshawRTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
RTI Health Solutions · USResearch Triangle Park Foundation · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBronchodilators such as long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) and long-acting β

objectiveThe objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of maintenance treatment with UMEC/VI compared with tiotropium (TIO) 18 μg, open dual LAMA + LABA treatment, or no long-acting bronchodilator treatment in patients with moderate to very severe COPD.

methodsA Markov model was developed to estimate the costs and outcomes associated with UMEC/VI treatment in patients with moderate to very severe COPD (GSK study number: HO-13-13411). Clinical efficacy, costs, utilities, and mortality obtained from the published literature were used as the model inputs. Costs are presented in US dollars based on 2015 prices. The model outputs are total costs, drug costs, other medical costs, number of COPD exacerbations, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Costs and outcomes were discounted at a 3% annual rate. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the effects of changing parameters on the uncertainty of the results.

resultsUMEC/VI treatment for moderate to very severe COPD was associated with lower lifetime medical costs ($82,344) compared with TIO ($88,822), open dual LAMA + LABA treatment ($114,442), and no long-acting bronchodilator ($86,751). Fewer exacerbations were predicted to occur with UMEC/VI treatment compared with no long-acting bronchodilator treatment. UMEC/VI provided an 0.11 and 0.25 increase in QALYs compared with TIO and no long-acting bronchodilator treatment, and as such, dominated these cost-effectiveness analyses. Sensitivity analyses confirmed that the results were robust.

conclusionThe results from this model suggest that UMEC/VI treatment would be dominant compared with TIO and no long-acting bronchodilator treatment, and less costly than open dual LAMA + LABA treatment in patients with moderate to very severe COPD.

Indexed as

Drug CostsModels, EconomicAdministration, InhalationAdrenergic beta-2 Receptor AgonistsBenzyl AlcoholsBronchodilator AgentsChlorobenzenesCost-Benefit AnalysisDrug CombinationsHumansMarkov ChainsMuscarinic AntagonistsPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveQuality-Adjusted Life YearsQuinuclidinesSeverity of Illness IndexAdrenergic beta-2 Receptor AgonistsBenzyl AlcoholsBronchodilator AgentsChlorobenzenesDrug CombinationsGSK573719Muscarinic AntagonistsQuinuclidinesTiotropium BromidevilanterolCOPDcost-effectivenesstiotropiumumeclidiniumvilanterol

Identifiers

PMID28392684
PMCPMC5373831
OpenAlexW2601087692

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.