Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 12, 2025

Dry Powder and Nebulized Aerosol Inhalation of Pharmaceuticals Delivered to Mice Using a Nose-only Exposure System
Published on: April 6, 2017
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of a Once-Daily Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy for Patients with Chronic Obstructive
Melanie Schroeder1, Nicole Benjamin2, Laura Atienza3
1Value Evidence and Outcomes, GlaxoSmithKline plc., Brentford, UK.
Purpose:
To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of once-daily fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) vs twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FOR) in patients with symptomatic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) at risk of exacerbations, from the Spanish National Healthcare System perspective.
Patients And Methods:
The validated GALAXY-COPD model was used to simulate disease progression and predict healthcare costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) over a 3-year time horizon for a Spanish population. Patient characteristics from published literature were supplemented by data from FULFIL (NCT02345161), which compared FF/UMEC/VI vs BUD/FOR in patients with symptomatic COPD at risk of exacerbations. Treatment effects, extrapolated to 3 years, were based on Week 24 results in the FULFIL intent-to-treat population, including change in forced expiratory volume in 1 second, St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire score, and exacerbation rates. Treatment, exacerbations, and COPD management costs (2019€) were informed by Spanish public sources and published literature. A 3% discount rate for costs and benefits was applied. One-way sensitivity and scenario analyses, and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA), were performed.
Results:
FF/UMEC/VI treatment led to fewer moderate and severe exacerbations (2.126 and 0.306, respectively) vs BUD/FOR (2.608 and 0.515, respectively), with a mean incremental cost of €69 and gain of 0.107 QALYs, which resulted in an ICER of €642 per QALY gained. In sensitivity analyses, the ICER was most sensitive to treatment effect variations in exacerbations and healthcare resource utilization/event costs. Overall, 95% of 1000 PSA simulations resulted in an ICER less than €11,000 per QALY gained for FF/UMEC/VI vs BUD/FOR, confirming robustness of the results. The probability of FF/UMEC/VI being cost-effective vs BUD/FOR was 100% at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €30,000 per QALY gained.
Conclusion:
At the accepted Spanish ICER threshold of €30,000, FF/UMEC/VI represents a cost-effective treatment option vs BUD/FOR in patients with symptomatic COPD at risk of exacerbations.
Related Concept Videos
COPD: Management Using Bronchodilators and Corticosteroids
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease-IV: Assessement and Diagnostic Studies
Medical History
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Smoking is a primary risk factor for COPD, with over 80% of patients having a history of it. Patients typically experience progressive dyspnea or labored breathing, frequent coughing, and recurrent pulmonary infections. Many eventually succumb to respiratory failure, characterized by...
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease-V: Management
Smoking Cessation
Inhaled Medications
Pulmonary Function Tests
Pulmonary Function Tests are crucial diagnostic tools for assessing respiratory function, particularly in patients with chronic respiratory disorders. They comprehensively evaluate lung volumes, ventilatory function, breathing mechanics, diffusion, and gas exchange. These tests help diagnose pulmonary diseases and play a significant role in monitoring disease progression, evaluating disability, and assessing response to therapy.
PFTs involve using a spirometer, a...

