Scholarlink

Background <p>COPD is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide and in Colombia. Although single-inhaler triple therapies have demonstrated superior clinical benefits in patients with previous exacerbations, their economic value in middle-income settings remains uncertain. Our objective was to evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) versus budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol (BUD/GLY/FOR) in Colombian patients with COPD.</p> Methods <p>We developed an individual-level microsimulation model to compare FF/UMEC/VI with BUD/GLY/FOR from the Colombian public payer perspective. The model incorporated GOLD-based progression, exacerbations, mortality, dynamic adherence functions, costs, and utilities derived from a Colombian cohort study.</p> Results <p>FF/UMEC/VI increased QALYs by 0.51 and saved USD 1,038 per patient, remaining dominant across deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. <b>Net monetary benefit (NMB)</b> was higher with FF/UMEC/VI. After 10,000 microsimulations, FF/UMEC/VI showed &gt; 95% probability of cost-effectiveness at Colombia’s willingness to pay of <b>USD</b> 5,180/QALY.</p> Conclusions <p>This is the first economic evaluation of FF/UMEC/VI and BUD/GLY/FOR in Colombia, incorporating local real-world data and adherence. Results demonstrate that FF/UMEC/VI is a cost-effective and often dominant option, supporting its adoption in resource-limited settings.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Cost-Effectiveness of FF/UMEC/VI vs BUD/GLY/FOR in Moderate-to-Very Severe COPD

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月16日

查看全文
  • Jefferson Antonio Buendía,
  • Oscar Muñoz-Mejía,
  • Luisa Fernanda Manrique Acevedo,
  • Carlos Andres Celis-Preciado

摘要

Background

COPD is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide and in Colombia. Although single-inhaler triple therapies have demonstrated superior clinical benefits in patients with previous exacerbations, their economic value in middle-income settings remains uncertain. Our objective was to evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) versus budesonide/glycopyrronium/formoterol (BUD/GLY/FOR) in Colombian patients with COPD.

Methods

We developed an individual-level microsimulation model to compare FF/UMEC/VI with BUD/GLY/FOR from the Colombian public payer perspective. The model incorporated GOLD-based progression, exacerbations, mortality, dynamic adherence functions, costs, and utilities derived from a Colombian cohort study.

Results

FF/UMEC/VI increased QALYs by 0.51 and saved USD 1,038 per patient, remaining dominant across deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Net monetary benefit (NMB) was higher with FF/UMEC/VI. After 10,000 microsimulations, FF/UMEC/VI showed > 95% probability of cost-effectiveness at Colombia’s willingness to pay of USD 5,180/QALY.

Conclusions

This is the first economic evaluation of FF/UMEC/VI and BUD/GLY/FOR in Colombia, incorporating local real-world data and adherence. Results demonstrate that FF/UMEC/VI is a cost-effective and often dominant option, supporting its adoption in resource-limited settings.