Medpedia

Real-life Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of Qvar Versus FP and BDP in the Management of COPD

Completed
01/01/2001 to 07/01/2007
815377
N/A
Observational
Primary care COPD patients who at an index prescription date either initiated ICS therapy as extrafine HFA-BDP, CFC-BDP or FP via MDI or had an increase in baseline BDP-equivalent ICS dose the index data as extrafine HFA-BDP, CFC-BDP or FP via MDI

Conditions

  • Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Eligibility

40 - 80
No
Inclusion Criteria:
- Aged ≥40 years at index prescription date
- COPD diagnosis:
- diagnostic code, and
- ≥2 prescriptions for COPD therapy in baseline year (at different points in time)
- For the ICS increase cohort (i.e. IPDA) ≥1 of these prescriptions must be
for ICS therapy.
- Commence ICS therapy at any time (even if before COPD diagnosis is made)
Exclusion Criteria:
- A diagnostic read code for any other chronic respiratory disease (except asthma)

Purpose

Current asthma guidelines in the UK are underpinned by evidence derived from randomised
controlled trials (RCTs). Although RCT data are considered the gold standard, patients
recruited to asthma RCTs are estimated to represent less than 10% of the UK's asthma
population. The poor representation of the asthma population is due to a number of factors,
such as tightly-controlled inclusion criteria for RCTs. There is, therefore, a need for more
representative RCTs and real-life observational studies to inform existing guidelines and
help optimise asthma outcomes.

Short randomised trials have shown that Qvar is at least as effective as FP pMDI and as BDP
pMDI at half the prescribed dose in patients with asthma. There is also evidence to suggest
that, in adults, HFA formulation as used by Qvar (featuring BDP in solution rather than
suspension) may achieve 10-fold higher deposition compared with CFC-BDP.4 Furthermore,
deposition in the peripheral regions is higher compared with CFC-BDP and the fine-particle
formulation also offers greater tolerance of poor co-ordination of breathing and inhaler
actuation, resulting in lower oro-pharyngeal deposition compared with CFC-BDP.

Evidence of the efficacy of ICS monotherapy in COPD remains mixed at this time. While Qvar
and ICS monotherapy use in the treatment of COPD is currently off-label, it occurs in
clinical practice in two common scenarios:

1. before a diagnosis of COPD is made

2. unlicensed use as monotherapy, or in combination with long-acting bronchodilators

The study hypothesis, therefore, is that Qvar treatment in COPD may be associated with
improved disease management and control (as assessed by effectiveness, cost-effectiveness
and direct healthcare costs of managing COPD) compared with other commonly used ICS
therapies, namely BPD and FP, by virtue of its improved deposition throughout the lungs and
the small airways.

Interventions

  • Drug: Extra-fine hydrofluoroalkane beclomethasone MDI
    Step-up in baseline BDP-equivalent ICS dose
  • Drug: Chlorofluorocarbon beclomethasone metered dose inhaler
    Step-up in baseline BDP-equivalent ICS dose
  • Drug: Fluticasone propionate metred dose inhaler
    Step-up in baseline BDP-equivalent ICS dose
  • Drug: Fluticasone propionate metred dose inhaler
    Initiation of ICS therapy
  • Drug: Hydrofluoroalkane beclomethasone metred dose inhaler
    Initiation of ICS therapy
  • Drug: Chlorofluorocarbon beclomethasone dipropionate
    Initiation of ICS therapy

Outcome Measures

  • Total number of exacerbations; exacerbation rate ratio; time to first after IPD
    Two-year outcome period
    Safety Issue: No
  • COPD treatment success
    Two-year outcome period
    Safety Issue: No
  • COPD treatment success factoring in change in therapy
    Two-year outcome period
    Safety Issue: No
  • COPD treatment success factoring in change in therapy unrelated to cost savings
    Two-year outcome period
    Safety Issue: No
  • Change in ICS dosing
    Two-year outcome period
    Safety Issue: No
  • Rate of hospitalisations
    Two-year outcomes
    Safety Issue: Yes
  • SABA usage
    Two-year outcome
    Safety Issue: No
  • Mortality
    Two-years
    Safety Issue: Yes
  • Incidence of pneumonia
    Two-year outcome
    Safety Issue: Yes
  • Incremental cost effectiveness ratio
    Two-year outcome
    Safety Issue: No
  • Cost of total healthcare treatment
    Two-year outcome
    Safety Issue: No
  • Costs for COPD treatment
    Two-year outcome
    Safety Issue: No

Officials

  • David Price, Prof. MD
    Principal Investigator, Company Director
  • Alison Chisholm, MSc
    Study Director, Research Project Director

Locations

  • General Practice Research Database
    London, SW8 5NQ, United Kingdom
    Completed

Sponsors

  • Research in Real-Life Ltd
    Lead Sponsor
  • United Kingdom: Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency

Links

Comments

There are no comments for this clinical trial.

Add a new comment

Have you participated in this clinical trial? Let us know how it went.
You must be signed in to post a comment. - Sign in now
Editor Directory - browse by last initial
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Professional Directory - browse by last initial
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
Cancel