Economic Evaluation of Fluticasone Propionate/Formoterol (Flutiform®) vs. Fluticasone/Salmeterol and Budesonide/Formoterol in Spain

Moragón, Eva Martínez; Delgado, J.; Ojeda, Pedro; Llano, Luis Pérez del; Collar, J.M.; Rodríguez, Cristina Antón; Saborido, C Martin

doi:10.1007/s41030-016-0021-3

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 16 publications

(11 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Analysis was conducted in Spain also with a similar objective [ 52 ]. FF was economical to acquire than fluticasone-salmeterol or budesonide-formoterol (20% and 30%, respectively).…”

Section: Budget Impact Of the Ff Single Inhalermentioning

confidence: 99%

Inhaled Formoterol-Fluticasone Single Inhaler Therapy in Asthma: Real-World Efficacy, Budget Impact, and Potential to Improve Adherence

Rajesh

Augustine

Divya

et al. 2020

Canadian Respiratory Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Asthma is the commonest chronic disease affecting airways in humans and has an increasing global disease burden. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are the first-line therapeutic option for asthma, and addition of a long-acting beta 2-agonist (LABA) has been shown to improve asthma control. A combination of the two agents in a single inhaler is beneficial with regard to ease of administration and patient compliance. Various ICS-LABA formulations are available across various countries in the world, one among them being formoterol-fluticasone. Both formoterol and fluticasone have pharmacologic peculiarities which places the combination in a uniquely advantageous position when it comes to asthma therapy. The present review focuses on some of the, hitherto, less explored aspects of this combination inhaler such as real-world efficacy, impact on budget allocation, results of switch-over therapy, and potential to improve adherence to asthma treatment. It also provides practical recommendations on positioning it in real-world asthma management.

show abstract

“…Analysis was conducted in Spain also with a similar objective [ 52 ]. FF was economical to acquire than fluticasone-salmeterol or budesonide-formoterol (20% and 30%, respectively).…”

Section: Budget Impact Of the Ff Single Inhalermentioning

confidence: 99%

Inhaled Formoterol-Fluticasone Single Inhaler Therapy in Asthma: Real-World Efficacy, Budget Impact, and Potential to Improve Adherence

Rajesh

Augustine

Divya

et al. 2020

Canadian Respiratory Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Cost–consequence analysis of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol for asthma management in Spain: an analysis based on the Salford Lung Study in asthma

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives The Salford Lung Study in asthma (SLS asthma) is a 12-month, open-label randomised clinical trial comparing clinical effectiveness of initiating once-daily inhaled combination of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI) 184/22 mcg or 92/22 mcg, with continuing optimized usual care (UC) with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) alone, or in combination with a long-acting β2-agonist (ICS/LABA), in asthmatic patients followed in primary care in the UK. The objective of the analysis is to estimate the economic impact of these results when applied in Spain. Methods A 1-year cost-consequence model was populated with SLS asthma, adopting the Spanish National Health System (NHS) perspective. 775,900 of diagnosed asthmatic patients ≥ 18 years old currently managed with UC in Spain were included in the analysis. Effectiveness data included the percentage of patients per Asthma Control Test (ACT) category at 24 and 52 weeks from SLS asthma. Direct costs (pharmacological and per ACT category) were estimated from Spanish public sources and literature (€, 2018). Base case analysis assumed an increased use of FF/VI from 10 to 20% within 1 year. One-way sensitivity analyses were performed. Results Within the 775,900 asthmatic patients analysed, substitution of UC with FF/VI was associated with reduced costs due to ACT improvement, leading to potential total annual savings of €4,927,672. Sensitivity analyses ranged from €6,012,975 to €14,783,015 cost savings associated with FF/VI. An analysis considering patients only on ICS/LABA showed potential cost savings of €8,207,448. Conclusions The improved asthma control for FF/VI compared with UC observed in SLS asthma could be translated into potential savings for the Spanish NHS. These results may be useful for decision makers.

show abstract

Correction to: Cost–consequence analysis of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol for asthma management in Spain: an analysis based on the Salford Lung Study in asthma

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Economic Evaluation of Fluticasone Propionate/Formoterol (Flutiform®) vs. Fluticasone/Salmeterol and Budesonide/Formoterol in Spain

Cited by 4 publications

References 16 publications

Inhaled Formoterol-Fluticasone Single Inhaler Therapy in Asthma: Real-World Efficacy, Budget Impact, and Potential to Improve Adherence

Inhaled Formoterol-Fluticasone Single Inhaler Therapy in Asthma: Real-World Efficacy, Budget Impact, and Potential to Improve Adherence

Cost–consequence analysis of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol for asthma management in Spain: an analysis based on the Salford Lung Study in asthma

Correction to: Cost–consequence analysis of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol for asthma management in Spain: an analysis based on the Salford Lung Study in asthma

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About