ArticleInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2023
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Fixed-Dose Tiotropium/Olodaterol versus Tiotropium for COPD Patients in China.
Article in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Tiotropium/olodaterol (TIO/OLO) fixed-dose combination (FDC) can improve lung function and quality of life for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and is not inferior to other LAMA/LABAs. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of TIO/OLO FDC in patients with moderate to very severe COPD in China. Methods: A Markov model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of TIO/OLO FDC versus TIO in the treatment of COPD from Chinese health system perspective. Four health states were based on 2021 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD 2021), which included moderate (GOLD II, 50% ≤ FEV1 ≤ 80% of predicted), severe (GOLD III, 30% ≤ FEV1 ≤ 50% of predicted) and very severe (GOLD IV, FEV1 > 30% of predicted) COPD and death. The model simulated in cycles yearly. The indicators of total costs, number of COPD exacerbations, life years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were used as the model output. Costs and outcomes were discounted at a 5% annual rate. A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted over a 10-year time horizon. The threshold of incremental total cost per unit effectiveness gained (ICER) was 1.5 times of GDP per capita. Uncertainty was assessed by one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Results: TIO/OLO was 0.007 QALYs more than TIO but 0.012 LYs lower, which increased the total cost by $2268.17 per patient, but the total exacerbations number was less. Incremental cost effectiveness analysis had shown that the ICER exceeded the willingness to pay threshold. Results were robust under most parameter variation, except the parameters of total drug cost of TIO/OLO FDC in univariate sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: Although TIO/OLO FDC could reduce the exacerbation risk, it was not cost-effective, and needed to be repriced.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.