Comparing Costs and Healthcare Resource Utilization (HCRU) Using LAMA versus LABA/ICS at Treatment Initiation for COPD: Findings from CITRUS (Comparing the Incidence of Tiotropium and ICS/LABA in Real-World Use in South Korea) Study

Abstract

Background COPD causes substantial economic burden on healthcare. Alternative treatment strategies for COPD can be associated with different costs dependent upon their relative safety and effectiveness. We compared costs and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) associated with LAMA or LABA/ICS initiation. Methods Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, we enrolled COPD patients initiating treatment with LAMA or LABA/ICS between January 2005 and April 2015. Propensity score matched individuals were compared on all-cause and COPD-related medical costs and HCRU over a three-year follow-up period. Results A total of 2444 patients were enrolled in each treatment group. LAMA group was associated with significantly lower costs than LABA/ICS group, both in all-cause (403.08 vs 474.50 USD per patient per month [PPPM], cost ratio 1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.10–1.26, p <0.0001) and COPD-related (216.37 vs 267.32 USD PPPM, cost ratio 1.24, 95% CI=1.13–1.35, p <0.0001) medical costs. All-cause HCRU was not significantly different between groups, while COPD-related HRCU was higher in LAMA group (0.66 vs 0.60 medical visits PPPM, p <0.0001). Conclusion COPD patients initiating treatment with LAMA were associated with lower all-cause and COPD-related medical costs than those starting with LABA/ICS despite the similar all-cause HCRU and higher COPD-related HCRU. Initiation with LAMA is a cost-efficient option for the treatment of COPD.