Evidence Hub

Comparative adherence and persistence of single-inhaler and multiple-inhaler triple therapies among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Japan: a retrospective cohort study

Sandra Jokšaitė, R. Wood, A. Ismaila, Lucinda J. Camidge, Akiko Mizukami, A. Czira, Olivia Massey, Masao Yarita et al.

BMJ Open, 2024

688 participants · 10 citations

Abstract

Objectives To evaluate and compare medication adherence and persistence for patients newly initiating single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) and multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in Japan. Design Retrospective, new-user, active comparator, observational cohort study using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Setting Health insurance claims data from the Medical Data Vision Co., Ltd, hospital claims database. Participants Adults diagnosed with COPD at age ≥40 years newly initiating MITT or SITT (fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) or formoterol fumarate/budesonide/glycopyrronium) from 1 September 2019 to 31 July 2021. Primary and secondary outcome measures The primary outcome was medication adherence compared between patients using SITT and MITT, assessed by the proportion of days covered ≥80%. Secondary outcomes included medication persistence (time from index treatment initiation to discontinuation) compared between patients using SITT and MITT and medication adherence compared before and after the switch in a subgroup of patients switching from MITT to SITT. Results We included 2575 MITT and 2962 SITT users with similar baseline characteristics following weighting. The proportion of adherent patients was significantly greater for SITT versus MITT users at 6 months (19.7% vs 10.2%, p<0.0001), 12 months (6.0% vs 3.8%, p=0.0009) and 18 months (3.8% vs 1.4%, p<0.0001) post-index. Median persistence…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 688 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free