Cost-effectiveness of fluticasone propionate in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a double-blind randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a debilitating disease and places a large financial burden on health-care systems and society. We prospectively evaluated the cost-effectiveness offluticasone propionate (FP) treatment in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD, who were symptomatic on regular bronchodilator therapy.

Methods: An economic analysis was performed in a 6-month, randomized, double-blind clinical trial comparing FP 1,000 microg/day with placebo in 281 patients aged 45-79 years with symptomatic moderate-to-severe COPD. Data on clinical efficacy, health-care resource use and productivity loss associated with the management of COPD were prospectively collected. The main outcome measures were the incremental cost-effectiveness of achieving a > or = 10% improvement in FEV1 and of remaining exacerbation-free throughout the study. The economic evaluation was costed from the perspective of the NHS (direct costs) and of society (direct and indirect costs).

Results: FP was significantly more effective than placebo in terms of the proportions of patients demonstrating a > or = 10% improvement in FEV1 (32 vs. 19%; P = 0.02) and remaining free of moderate/severe exacerbations (75 vs. 63%; P = 0.02). The difference between the groups in total costs was not significantly different. Incremental cost-effectiveness analyses showed that the additional clinical benefits of FP relativeto placebo, in terms of a > or = 10% improvement in FEV1 or an increased number of patients free of moderate/severe exacerbations, were achieved at minimal additional costs from an NHS perspective (additional 0.25 pounds per day for bath) or at a net saving from a societal perspective. Sensitivity analysis showed that these results were robust to changes in the underlying assumptions.

Conclusions: Treatment with FP was associated with statistically significant clinical benefits in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD currently symptomatic on regular bronchodilator therapy. As the differences in direct and total costs compared with placebo were small and non-significant, this treatment can be considered cost-effective in this patient population.