Cost effectiveness of tiotropium for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review of the evidence

Abstract

The main conclusions of the economic evaluations derived from clinical trial data at the time of product approval and from later observational data reflecting clinical use are similar: use of tiotropium monotherapy is associated with lower hospital and other non-drug costs and better health outcomes and is either cost saving or cost effective compared with other maintenance monotherapies.

Olodaterol + tiotropium bromide for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

“…Tiotropium provides better health outcomes than standard monotherapies for a cost that represents value for money [54]. Often, it produces cost savings and is therefore the dominant product [55].…”

Cost-utility analysis of tiotropium versus usual care in patients with COPD in the UK and Belgium

“…4 Several published economic evaluations have shown that treatment with tiotropium leads to lower hospital costs and better health outcomes compared to monotherapies, resulting in cost-savings or cost-effectiveness favouring tiotropium. 7 In a recent systematic review, Mauskopf and colleagues identified five model based economic evaluations assessing the cost-effectiveness of tiotropium over 1year (N Z 3) and 5-year time horizons (N Z 2). 7 All of these studies modelled effect based on data from short-term clinical trials.…”

“…7 In a recent systematic review, Mauskopf and colleagues identified five model based economic evaluations assessing the cost-effectiveness of tiotropium over 1year (N Z 3) and 5-year time horizons (N Z 2). 7 All of these studies modelled effect based on data from short-term clinical trials. The 5-year models relied on the extrapolation of data beyond the then available trial treatment periods.…”

Trends in Health Care Utilization in British Columbia Following Public Coverage for Tiotropium

“…It could also have been that tiotropium in usual practice had little or no advantage over ipratropium in improving those measures. A systematic review of tiotropium cost-effectiveness concluded that tiotropium is either cost-saving or cost-effective compared to other maintenance monotherapies [24]. However, the review, which used mostly data from randomized trials, also found that total costs were lower with tiotropium in some but not all studies included in the analysis.…”