Is single-inhaler triple therapy cost-effective versus multiple-inhaler triple therapy for COPD in Germany? The INTREPID trial

<bold>AIM:</bold> The INTREPID trial demonstrated the clinical benefits of fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) versus non-ELLIPTA multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT) for the treatment of COPD in a usual clinical practice setting (Halpin, 2019 ERJ Open Res, 7[2]). This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of FF/UMEC/VI vs. non-ELLIPTA MITT for treating symptomatic COPD from a German healthcare perspective. <bold>Methods:</bold> Baseline characteristics, treatment effects (forced expiratory volume in 1 second and St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire score [derived from exploratory COPD Assessment Test score mapping]) and discontinuation data from the INTREPID trial, along with German healthcare resource and drug costs (2023) were used to populate the GALAXY COPD disease progression model (Briggs, 2017 <italic>Med Decis Making</italic>,37[4]). <bold>Results:</bold> Over a life-time horizon, using deterministic analyses, FF/UMEC/VI provided an additional 0.174 life years (95% range: 0.065, 0.322) and 0.261 quality-adjusted life years (0.186, 0.346), with a cost saving of €2,850 per patient (−€3,517, −€2,220); patients on FF/UMEC/VI also had fewer exacerbations (−0.063). Hence, FF/UMEC/VI was the dominant treatment option (Table). <bold>Conclusions:</bold> FF/UMEC/VI may help to reduce the clinical and economic burden of COPD and may be considered by physicians as a preferred treatment option in Germany. <bold>Funding:</bold> GSK 206973 <fig><object-id>erj;64/suppl_68/PA2124/F1</object-id><object-id>F1</object-id><object-id>F1</object-id><graphic></graphic></fig>