Back to Journals » International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease » Volume 11 » Issue 1

Cost-effectiveness and budget impact of the fixed-dose dual bronchodilator combination tiotropium–olodaterol for patients with COPD in the Netherlands

Authors van Boven J, Kocks J, Postma MJ

Received 10 June 2016

Accepted for publication 4 August 2016

Published 19 September 2016 Volume 2016:11(1) Pages 2191—2201


Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewers approved by Dr Amy Norman

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Dr Richard Russell

Job FM van Boven,1,2 Janwillem WH Kocks,2 Maarten J Postma1,3,4

1Department of Pharmacy, Unit of PharmacoEpidemiology & PharmacoEconomics, 2Department of General Practice, Groningen Research Institute for Asthma and COPD (GRIAC), 3Institute of Science in Healthy Aging & healthcaRE (SHARE), 4Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen (UMCG), University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands

Purpose: The fixed-dose dual bronchodilator combination (FDC) of tiotropium and olodaterol showed increased effectiveness regarding lung function and health-related quality of life in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) compared with the use of its mono-components. Yet, while effectiveness and safety have been shown, the health economic implication of this treatment is still unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the cost–utility and budget impact of tiotropium–olodaterol FDC in patients with moderate to very severe COPD in the Netherlands.
Patients and methods: A cost–utility study was performed, using an individual-level Markov model. To populate the model, individual patient-level data (age, height, sex, COPD duration, baseline forced expiratory volume in 1 second) were obtained from the tiotropium–olodaterol TOnado trial. In the model, forced expiratory volume in 1 second and patient-level data were extrapolated to utility and survival, and treatment with tiotropium–olodaterol FDC was compared with tiotropium. Cost–utility analysis was performed from the Dutch health care payer’s perspective using a 15-year time horizon in the base-case analysis. The standard Dutch discount rates were applied (costs: 4.0%; effects: 1.5%). Both univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Budget impact was annually assessed over a 5-year time horizon, taking into account different levels of medication adherence.
Results: As a result of cost increases, combined with quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gains, results showed that tiotropium–olodaterol FDC had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €7,004/QALY. Without discounting, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €5,981/QALY. Results were robust in univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Budget impact was estimated at €4.3 million over 5 years assuming 100% medication adherence. Scenarios with 40%, 60%, and 80% adherence resulted in lower 5-year incremental cost increases of €1.7, €2.6, and €3.4 million, respectively.
Conclusion: Tiotropium–olodaterol FDC can be considered a cost-effective treatment under current Dutch cost-effectiveness thresholds.

Keywords: COPD, cost-effectiveness, health economics, cost–utility, budget impact

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]