P240 Evaluating patient preferences of maintenance therapy for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the UK: a discrete choice experiment

Schroeder, Maik; Lewis, Heather; Doll, Helen; Gunsoy, NB; Llewellyn, Samuel; Jones, P. W.; Ismaila, AS

doi:10.1136/thorax-2018-212555.397

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Reducing the number of inhalers required and frequency of use should improve treatment persistence and adherence, which could in turn improve clinical effectiveness and patient outcomes [ 4 , 5 ]. Fewer inhalers and reduced treatment complexity has been highlighted as a preferred treatment strategy for patients with COPD [ 6 , 7 ]. In addition, the use of multiple inhalers has been associated with more frequent errors in inhaler technique compared with therapy administered via a single inhaler [ 8 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

INTREPID: single- versus multiple-inhaler triple therapy for COPD in usual clinical practice

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionReal-world trial data comparing single- with multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT) in COPD patients are currently lacking. The effectiveness of once-daily single-inhaler fluticasone furoate (FF)/umeclidinium (UMEC)/vilanterol (VI) and MITT were compared in usual clinical care.MethodsINTREPID was a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase IV effectiveness study comparing FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25 µg via the ELLIPTA inhaler with a clinician's choice of any approved non-ELLIPTA MITT in usual COPD clinical practice in five European countries. Primary end-point was proportion of COPD Assessment Test (CAT) responders (≥2-unit decrease in CAT score from baseline) at week 24. Secondary end-points in a subpopulation included change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and percentage of patients making at least one critical error in inhalation technique at week 24. Safety was also assessed.Results3092 patients were included (FF/UMEC/VI n=1545; MITT n=1547). The proportion of CAT responders at week 24 was significantly greater with FF/UMEC/VI versus non-ELLIPTA MITT (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.13–1.51; p<0.001) and mean change from baseline in FEV1 was significantly greater with FF/UMEC/VI (77 mL versus 28 mL; treatment difference 50 mL, 95% CI 26–73 mL; p<0.001). The percentage of patients with at least one critical error in inhalation technique was low in both groups (FF/UMEC/VI 6%; non-ELLIPTA MITT 3%). Safety profiles, including incidence of pneumonia serious adverse events, were similar between treatments.ConclusionsIn a usual clinical care setting, treatment with once-daily single-inhaler FF/UMEC/VI resulted in significantly more patients gaining health status improvement and greater lung function improvement versus non-ELLIPTA MITT.

show abstract