• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

噻托溴铵与沙美特罗的成本效益比较:POET-COPD 试验。

Cost-effectiveness of tiotropium versus salmeterol: the POET-COPD trial.

机构信息

Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Eur Respir J. 2013 Mar;41(3):556-64. doi: 10.1183/09031936.00027212. Epub 2012 Jun 14.

DOI:10.1183/09031936.00027212
PMID:22700844
Abstract

The aim of this study was to perform a 1-yr trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of tiotropium versus salmeterol followed by a 5-yr model-based CEA. The within-trial CEA, including 7,250 patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), was performed alongside the 1-yr international randomised controlled Prevention of Exacerbations with Tiotropium (POET)-COPD trial comparing tiotropium with salmeterol regarding the effect on exacerbations. Main end-points of the trial-based analysis were costs, number of exacerbations and exacerbation days. The model-based analysis was conducted to extrapolate results to 5 yrs and to calculate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). 1-yr costs per patient from the German statutory health insurance (SHI) perspective and the societal perspective were €126 (95% uncertainty interval (UI) €55-195) and €170 (95% UI €77-260) higher for tiotropium, respectively. The annual number of exacerbations was 0.064 (95% UI 0.010-0.118) lower for tiotropium, leading to a reduction in exacerbation-related costs of €87 (95% UI €19-157). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €1,961 per exacerbation avoided from the SHI perspective and €2,647 from the societal perspective. In the model-based analyses, the 5-yr costs per QALY were €3,488 from the SHI perspective and €8,141 from the societal perspective. Tiotropium reduced exacerbations and exacerbation-related costs, but increased total costs. Tiotropium can be considered cost-effective as the resulting cost-effectiveness ratios were below commonly accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds.

摘要

本研究旨在进行为期 1 年的噻托溴铵与沙美特罗基于试验的成本效益分析(CEA),之后进行为期 5 年的基于模型的 CEA。在包括 7250 名中重度至重度慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者的试验内 CEA 中,与噻托溴铵比较沙美特罗对加重作用的国际随机对照预防加重(POET)-COPD 试验同时进行。该试验的主要终点是成本、加重次数和加重天数。基于模型的分析旨在将结果推断至 5 年,并计算质量调整生命年(QALY)。从德国法定健康保险(SHI)角度和社会角度来看,噻托溴铵的 1 年每位患者成本分别高出€126(95%置信区间(UI)€55-195)和€170(95% UI €77-260)。噻托溴铵的年加重次数减少了 0.064(95% UI 0.010-0.118),从而减少了与加重相关的成本€87(95% UI €19-157)。从 SHI 的角度来看,噻托溴铵每避免一次加重的增量成本效益比为€1961,从社会角度来看为€2647。在基于模型的分析中,从 SHI 的角度来看,每 QALY 的 5 年成本为€3488,从社会角度来看为€8141。噻托溴铵减少了加重和与加重相关的成本,但增加了总费用。噻托溴铵具有成本效益,因为产生的成本效益比低于普遍接受的支付意愿阈值。

相似文献

1
Cost-effectiveness of tiotropium versus salmeterol: the POET-COPD trial.噻托溴铵与沙美特罗的成本效益比较:POET-COPD 试验。
Eur Respir J. 2013 Mar;41(3):556-64. doi: 10.1183/09031936.00027212. Epub 2012 Jun 14.
2
Which long-acting bronchodilator is most cost-effective for the treatment of COPD?哪种长效支气管扩张剂治疗慢性阻塞性肺疾病最具成本效益?
Neth J Med. 2012 Oct;70(8):357-64.
3
Probabilistic Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of bronchodilator therapy in COPD patients in different countries.用于评估不同国家慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者支气管扩张剂治疗成本效益的概率马尔可夫模型。
Value Health. 2005 Jan-Feb;8(1):32-46. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.03086.x.
4
Modelling the 5-year cost effectiveness of tiotropium, salmeterol and ipratropium for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Spain.对噻托溴铵、沙美特罗和异丙托溴铵治疗西班牙慢性阻塞性肺疾病的5年成本效益进行建模。
Eur J Health Econ. 2007 Jun;8(2):123-35. doi: 10.1007/s10198-007-0039-4. Epub 2007 Mar 17.
5
Economic evaluation of tiotropium and salmeterol in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in Greece.噻托溴铵与沙美特罗治疗希腊慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)的经济学评价
Curr Med Res Opin. 2006 Aug;22(8):1599-607. doi: 10.1185/030079906X112778.
6
Cost-effectiveness analysis of roflumilast/tiotropium therapy versus tiotropium monotherapy for treating severe-to-very severe COPD.罗氟司特/噻托溴铵联合治疗与噻托溴铵单药治疗重度至极重度 COPD 的成本效果分析。
J Med Econ. 2011;14(6):805-15. doi: 10.3111/13696998.2011.623204. Epub 2011 Oct 12.
7
Cost-effectiveness of long-acting bronchodilators for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.长效支气管扩张剂用于慢性阻塞性肺疾病的成本效益
Mayo Clin Proc. 2007 May;82(5):575-82. doi: 10.4065/82.5.575.
8
Cost-utility analysis of tiotropium versus usual care in patients with COPD in the UK and Belgium.在英国和比利时,对 COPD 患者使用噻托溴铵与常规护理的成本-效用分析。
Respir Med. 2012 Dec;106(12):1722-33. doi: 10.1016/j.rmed.2012.09.006. Epub 2012 Oct 3.
9
Cost effectiveness of adding budesonide/formoterol to tiotropium in COPD in four Nordic countries.在四个北欧国家,慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者中,在噻托溴铵基础上加用布地奈德/福莫特罗的成本效益分析。
Respir Med. 2013 Nov;107(11):1709-21. doi: 10.1016/j.rmed.2013.06.007. Epub 2013 Jul 13.
10
Cost-utility analysis of indacaterol in Germany: a once-daily maintenance bronchodilator for patients with COPD.德国茚达特罗的成本-效用分析:一种用于 COPD 患者的每日一次维持性支气管扩张剂。
Respir Med. 2011 Nov;105(11):1635-47. doi: 10.1016/j.rmed.2011.06.005. Epub 2011 Jul 20.

引用本文的文献

1
Cost-effectiveness and budget impact of the fixed-dose dual bronchodilator combination tiotropium-olodaterol for patients with COPD in the Netherlands.噻托溴铵-奥达特罗固定剂量复方支气管扩张剂对荷兰慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者的成本效益及预算影响
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2016 Sep 19;11:2191-2201. doi: 10.2147/COPD.S114738. eCollection 2016.
2
Systematic Review and Quality Appraisal of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Pharmacologic Maintenance Treatment for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Methodological Considerations and Recommendations.慢性阻塞性肺疾病药物维持治疗成本效益分析的系统评价与质量评估:方法学考量与建议
Pharmacoeconomics. 2017 Jan;35(1):43-63. doi: 10.1007/s40273-016-0448-2.
3
Long-acting inhaled therapy (beta-agonists, anticholinergics and steroids) for COPD: a network meta-analysis.
慢性阻塞性肺疾病的长效吸入疗法(β受体激动剂、抗胆碱能药物和类固醇):一项网状荟萃分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Mar 26;2014(3):CD010844. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010844.pub2.