Abstract
Single inhaler triple therapy in patients with advanced COPD: healthcare resource utilisation and cost data from the FULFIL study
Background
FULFIL compared once-daily fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) 100μg/62.5μg/25μg via the ELLIPTA® inhaler with twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR) 400μg/12μg via the Turbuhaler® in patients (pts) with advanced COPD, showing statistically significant improvements in lung function and health-related quality of life with FF/UMEC/VI (Lomas et al. ERJ 2016;48:PA4629). We report healthcare resource utilisation and cost data from FULFIL.
Methods
Pts recorded unscheduled healthcare contacts (all-cause and COPD-related), including home visits, physician visits, urgent care/outpatient visits, emergency room visits, number of hospitalisation days and contacts for COPD exacerbations. Healthcare costs were calculated from 2016 UK National Health Service Reference Costs (post hoc).
Results
Over 24 weeks (ITT; FF/UMEC/VI, n=911; BUD/FOR, n=899), slightly fewer pts required overall healthcare contacts in the FF/UMEC/VI arm (19%) than BUD/FOR arm (20%). The proportion requiring contacts for exacerbations was lower for FF/UMEC/VI (8%) vs BUD/FOR (11%). Over 52 weeks (extension population [EXT]; FF/UMEC/VI, n=210; BUD/FOR, n=220), fewer pts in the FF/UMEC/VI arm vs the BUD/FOR arm required overall healthcare contacts or contacts for exacerbations (25% vs 33% and 12% vs 21%, respectively). Based on non-drug healthcare utilisation, non-drug costs per patient per year were lower for FF/UMEC/VI than BUD/FOR in the ITT (£653.80 vs £763.31) and EXT (£749.22 vs £988.03).
Conclusion
FF/UMEC/VI resulted in reduced healthcare contacts for exacerbations and non-drug healthcare costs among pts with COPD compared with BUD/FOR.
Funding
GSK (CTT116853)