Loading…
Rates of escalation to triple COPD therapy among incident users of LAMA and LAMA/LABA
Improved outcomes have been reported for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) receiving combination long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) therapy compared with LAMA monotherapy. However, little is known about the relative characteristics of these...
Saved in:
Published in: | Respiratory medicine 2018-06, Vol.139, p.65-71 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Improved outcomes have been reported for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) receiving combination long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting β2-agonist (LAMA/LABA) therapy compared with LAMA monotherapy. However, little is known about the relative characteristics of these patients and their rates of escalation to triple therapy (TT, combining a LAMA, LABA, and inhaled corticosteroid). This study aimed to characterize patients initiating treatment with the LAMA tiotropium (TIO) and the fixed-dose LAMA/LABA combination therapy umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI), and to compare rates of escalation to TT between patients receiving these therapies.
Retrospective study of patients with COPD enrolled in a US health insurance plan during 2013–2015 and newly initiated on TIO or UMEC/VI. Patients were ≥40 years of age at index (date of therapy initiation) with continuous enrollment for 12 months pre-index and ≥30 days post-index. LAMA users were propensity score matched 1:1 to LAMA/LABA users, with TT initiation rates reported by cohort using pharmacy claims.
35,357 patients initiating on TIO and 2407 patients initiating on UMEC/VI were identified. After propensity score matching, the rate of TT initiation was significantly higher in new TIO users (n = 1320) than in new UMEC/VI users (n = 1320) (0.92 vs 0.49 per 100 months of exposure, respectively; p |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0954-6111 1532-3064 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.rmed.2018.04.014 |