Search

Gema Requena,1 Alexandrosz Czira,1 Victoria Banks,2 Robert Wood,2 Theo Tritton,2 Catherine Castillo,2 Jie Yeap,2 Rosie Wild,2 Chris Compton,1 Kieran J Rothnie,1 Felix JF Herth,3 Jennifer K Quint,4 Afisi S Ismaila5,6 1GSK, R&D Global Medical, Brentford, Middlesex, UK; 2Real-World Evidence, Adelphi Real World, Bollington, Cheshire, UK; 3Department of Pneumology and Critical Care Medicine, Thoraxklinik, University of Heidelberg and Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; 4National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK; 5Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, Collegeville, PA, USA; 6Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, CanadaCorrespondence: Gema Requena, Epidemiology, Value Evidence and Outcomes, R&D Global Medical, GSK, Brentford, Middlesex, UK, Tel +44 20 80476893, Email gema.x.requena@gsk.comPurpose: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations are associated with significant morbidity and mortality and increased economic healthcare burden for patients with COPD. Long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA)/long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) dual therapy is recommended for patients receiving mono-bronchodilator therapy who experience exacerbations or ongoing breathlessness. This study compared two single-inhaler LAMA/LABA dual therapies, umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) and indacaterol/glycopyrronium (IND/GLY), on moderate-to-severe exacerbation rates in patients with COPD in England.Patients and Methods: This retrospective cohort study used linked primary care electronic health record data (Clinical Practice Research Datalink-Aurum) and secondary care data (Hospital Episode Statistics) to assess outcomes for patients with COPD who had a first prescription for single-inhaler UMEC/VI or IND/GLY (index date) between 1 January 2015 and 30 September 2019 (indexing period). Analyses compared UMEC/VI and IND/GLY on moderate-to-severe, moderate, and severe

Robyn Kendall,1 Alan A Martin,2 Dhvani Shah,3 Soham Shukla,4 Chris Compton,5 Afisi S Ismaila4,6 1ICON Health Economics, ICON plc, Vancouver, BC, Canada; 2Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, London, UK; 3ICON Health Economics, ICON plc, New York, NY, USA; 4Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, Collegeville, PA, USA; 5Global Respiratory Franchise, GSK, London, UK; 6Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, CanadaCorrespondence: Afisi S Ismaila, Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, 1250 South Collegeville Road, Collegeville, PA, 19426-0989, USA, Tel +1 919 315 8229, Email afisi.s.ismaila@gsk.comPurpose: For patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who remain symptomatic despite maintenance treatment, clinical management guidelines recommend a stepwise escalation from monotherapy to dual therapy, and from dual therapy to triple therapy. However, in clinical practice, patients are often escalated directly from monotherapy to triple therapy based on disease severity. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of once-daily, single-inhaler fluticasone furoate, umeclidinium, and vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) triple therapy compared with long-acting muscarinic antagonist monotherapy with once-daily tiotropium (TIO) in patients with symptomatic moderate-to-very severe COPD, from a UK National Health Service perspective.Patients and Methods: The validated GALAXY-COPD disease progression model was populated with patient baseline characteristics and treatment effect data from the 12-week GSK Study 207626 comparing FF/UMEC/VI with TIO in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD. UK unit costs and drug costs (British Pound, 2021) were applied to healthcare resource utilization and treatments. The base case analysis was conducted over a lifetime horizon, and costs and health outcomes (except for life years [LYs]) were discounted at 3.5% per year. Model outputs included exacerbation rates, healthcare costs, LYs, quality-adj

Alexandrosz Czira,1 Sneha Purushotham,2 Ike Iheanacho,2 Kieran J Rothnie,1 Chris Compton,3 Afisi S Ismaila4,5 1Value Evidence and Outcomes, R&D Global Medical, GSK, Brentford, UK; 2Evidera, London, UK; 3Global Medical, GSK, London, UK; 4Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, Collegeville, PA, USA; 5Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, CanadaCorrespondence: Alexandrosz Czira, Value Evidence and Outcomes, R&D Global Medical, GSK, 980 Great West Road, Brentford, Middlesex, TW8 9GS, UK, Tel +44 7788 351610, Email alexandrosz.x.czira@gsk.comBackground: Patients with mild or mild-to-moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), defined as Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) group A/B, are regarded as having a lower risk of experiencing multiple or severe exacerbations compared with patients classified as GOLD group C/D. Current guidelines suggest that patients in GOLD A/B should commence treatment with a bronchodilator; however, some patients within this population who have a higher disease burden may benefit from earlier introduction of dual bronchodilator or inhaled corticosteroid-containing therapies. This study aimed to provide research-based insights into the burden of disease experienced by patients classified as GOLD A/B, and to identify characteristics associated with poorer outcomes.Methods: A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted to identify evidence (burden of disease and prevalence data) relating to the population of interest (patients with COPD classified as GOLD A/B).Results: A total of 79 full-text publications and four conference abstracts were included. In general, the rates of moderate and severe exacerbations were higher among patients in GOLD group B than among those in group A. Among patients classified as GOLD A/B, the risk of exacerbation was higher in those with more symptoms (modified Medical Research Council or COPD Assessment Test scales)

Nicola A Hanania,1 Scott H Bunner,2 Lindsay GS Bengtson,2 Afisi S Ismaila,3,4 Michael Bogart5 1Section of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA; 2Optum, Eden Prairie, MN, USA; 3Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, Collegeville, PA, USA; 4Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada; 5US Value Evidence & Outcomes, GSK, Research Triangle Park, NC, USACorrespondence: Afisi S Ismaila, Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, 1250 S. Collegeville Road, Collegeville, PA, 19426-0989, USA, Tel +1 919-3158229, Email afisi.s.ismaila@gsk.comPurpose: To examine the impact of initiating fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) in a single device on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations, COPD exacerbation-related costs, and all-cause and COPD-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs in patients with COPD.Methods: Retrospective database analysis of patients with COPD aged ≥ 40 years who initiated FF/UMEC/VI between September 1, 2017, and December 31, 2018 (index date: first pharmacy claim for FF/UMEC/VI), following evidence of multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT) (≥ 30 consecutive days) in the year prior to index. COPD exacerbations, COPD exacerbation-related costs, and all-cause and COPD-related HCRU and costs were compared between the baseline period (12 months prior to and including index) and follow-up period (12 months following index).Results: Data from 912 patients (mean [SD] age: 71.2 [8.1], 51.2% female) were included in the analyses. Among the overall cohort, mean count of total COPD exacerbations (moderate or severe) per patient was statistically significantly lower in the follow-up period compared to baseline (1.2 vs 1.4, p=0.001). The proportion of patients with ≥ 1 COPD exacerbation (moderate or severe) was also statistically significantly lower in the follow-up period compared to baseline (56.4% vs 62.4%, p=0.00

Alexandrosz Czira,1 Gema Requena,1 Victoria Banks,2 Robert Wood,2 Theo Tritton,2 Catherine M Castillo,2 Jie Yeap,2 Rosie Wild,2 Chris Compton,1 Kieran J Rothnie,1 Felix Herth,3,4 Jennifer K Quint,5 Afisi S Ismaila6,7 1R&D Global Medical, GSK, Brentford, Middlesex, UK; 2Real-World Evidence, Adelphi Real World, Bollington, Cheshire, UK; 3Department of Pulmonology and Respiratory Care Medicine, Thoraxklinik at the University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany; 4Translational Lung Research Center Heidelberg, Member of the German Center for Lung Research DZL, Heidelberg, Germany; 5National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK; 6Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, Collegeville, PA, USA; 7Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, CanadaCorrespondence: Alexandrosz Czira, Value Evidence and Outcomes, R&D Global Medical, GSK, Brentford, Middlesex, UK, Tel +44 7788 351610, Email alexandrosz.x.czira@gsk.comPurpose: To compare adherence to once-daily umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI), a long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist (LAMA/LABA), and twice-daily inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)/LABA single-inhaler dual therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in a primary care cohort in England.Patients and Methods: Active comparator, new-user, retrospective cohort study using CPRD-Aurum primary care data and linked Hospital Episode Statistics secondary care administrative data. Patients without exacerbations in the previous year were indexed on first/earliest prescription date of once-daily UMEC/VI or twice-daily ICS/LABA as initial maintenance therapy between July 2014-September 2019. Primary outcome: medication adherence at 12 months post-index, defined as proportion of days covered (PDC) ≥ 80%. PDC represented proportion of time over the treatment duration that the patient was theoretically in possession of the medication. Secondary outcomes: adherence at

Gema Requena,1 Victoria Banks,2,* Alexandrosz Czira,1 Robert Wood,2 Theo Tritton,2 Rosie Wild,2 Chris Compton,1 Afisi S Ismaila3,4 1Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, R&D Global Medical, Brentford, Middlesex, UK; 2Real-World Evidence, Adelphi Real World, Bollington, Cheshire, UK; 3Value Evidence and Outcomes, GSK, Collegeville, PA, USA; 4Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada*At the time of the studyCorrespondence: Gema Requena, Epidemiology, Value Evidence and Outcomes, R&D Global Medical, GSK, Middlesex, UK, Tel +44 20 80476893, Email gema.x.requena@gsk.comPurpose: Selection of treatments for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may impact clinical outcomes, healthcare resource use (HCRU) and direct healthcare costs. We aimed to characterize these outcomes along with treatment patterns, for patients with COPD following initiation of single-inhaler long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) dual therapy in the primary care setting in England.Patients and Methods: This retrospective cohort study used linked primary care electronic medical record data (Clinical Practice Research Datalink-Aurum) and secondary care administrative data (Hospital Episode Statistics) in England to assess outcomes for patients with COPD who had a prescription for one of four single-inhaler LAMA/LABA dual therapies between 1st June 2015– 31st December 2018 (indexing period). Outcomes were assessed during a 12-month follow-up period from the index date (date of earliest prescription of a single-inhaler LAMA/LABA within the indexing period). Incident users were those without previous LAMA/LABA dual therapy prescriptions prior to index; this manuscript focuses on a subset of incident users: non-triple therapy users (patients without concomitant inhaled corticosteroid use at index).Results: Of 10,991 incident users included, 9888 (90.0%) were non-triple therap