Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Of Triple Combination Preparations In The Treatment Of Moderate-To-Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Objectives: This study analyzed the long-term cost-effectiveness of fluticasone/umeclidinium/vilanterol triple combination (FF/UMEC/VI) vs. budesonide/formoterol double combination (BUD/FOR) in the treatment of moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and provides evidence for COPD treatment decisions.Methods: From the perspective of the healthcare system, a Markov model was established that consists of four states-stable period, non-severely deteriorating period, severely deteriorating period, and death-according to real-world COPD progression. The model period comprises 6 months, with a cycle length of 14 years. The initial state, transition probabilities, costs, and utility data were collected from the FULFIL trial, published literature, hospital record surveys, and China Health Statistics Yearbook. The discount rate was 5%, and the threshold was set as the Chinese per capita GDP in 2020 ((sic)72,447). The cost, utility, transition probabilities, and discount rate were calculated through TreeagePro11 software. The results were analyzed via one-way factor analysis and probability sensitivity analysis.Results: The baseline study shows that the 14-year treatment for FF/UMEC/VI and BUD/FOR groups are (sic)199,765.55 and (sic)173,030.05 with effectiveness at 8.54 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and 7.73 QALYs, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is (sic)33,006.80/QALY, which is below the threshold. A tornado diagram of a one-way sensitivity analysis shows that the top three factors that affected the results are the non-severe deterioration rates of FF/UMEC/VI, the cost of FF/UMEC/VI and the non-severe deterioration rates of BUD/FOR. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis shows that FF/UMEC/VI (compared to BUD/FOR) can be made cost-effective under the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold ((sic)38,000). Furthermore, the likelihood of cost-effectiveness increases with a higher WTP.Conclusions: Compared with the double combination (BUD/FOR), the triple combination (FF/UMEC/VI) is more cost-effective under the Chinese per capita GDP threshold.