Scoring the best deal: Quantity discounts and street price variation of diverted oxycodone and oxymorphone.

PURPOSE: Diverted prescription opioids are significant contributors to drug overdose mortality. Street price has been suggested as an economic metric of the diverted prescription opioid black market. This study examined variables that may influence the street price of diverted oxycodone and oxymorphone. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted utilizing data from the previously validated, crowdsourcing website StreetRx. Street price reports of selected oxycodone and oxymorphone products, between August 22, 2014 and June 30, 2016, were considered for analysis. Geometric means and 95% confidence intervals were calculated comparing prices per milligram of drug in US dollars. Univariate and multivariable regressions were used to examine the influence of dosage strength, drug formulation, and bulk purchasing on street price. RESULTS: A total of 5611 oxycodone and 1420 oxymorphone reports were analyzed. Across various dosages and formulations, geometric mean prices per milligram ranged between $0.12 and $1.07 for oxycodone and $0.73 and $2.90 for oxymorphone. For a 2-fold increase in dosage strength, there is a 24.0% (95% CI: -28.1%, -19.6%, P < 0.001) and a 22.5% (95% CI: -24.2%, -20.8%, P < 0.001) decrease on average in price per milligram for oxycodone and oxymorphone, respectively. Lower potency, high dosage strength, crush-resistant opioids, and those purchased in bulk were significantly cheaper. CONCLUSION: Street prices for diverted oxycodone and oxymorphone are influenced by multiple factors including potency, dosage, formulation, and bulk purchasing. Buyers who purchase large quantities of low potency, large dosage, crush-resistant formulation prescription opioids can expect to achieve the lowest price.

An Expedited Care Pathway with Ambulatory Brachial Plexus Analgesia Is a Cost-effective Alternative to Standard Inpatient Care after Complex Arthroscopic Elbow Surgery: A Randomized, Single-blinded Study.

BACKGROUND: Common standard practice after complex arthroscopic elbow surgery includes hospital admission for 72 h. The authors hypothesized that an expedited care pathway, with 24 h of hospital admission and ambulatory brachial plexus analgesia and continuous passive motion at home, results in equivalent elbow range of motion (ROM) 2 weeks after surgery compared with standard 72-h hospital admission. METHODS: A randomized, single-blinded study was conducted after obtaining approval from the research ethics board. Forty patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio using a computer-generated list of random numbers into an expedited care pathway group (24-h admission) and a control group (72-h admission). They were treated equally aside from the predetermined hospital length of stay. RESULTS: Patients in the control (n = 19) and expedited care pathway (n = 19) groups achieved similar elbow ROM 2 weeks (119 ± 18 degrees and 121 ± 15 degrees, P = 0.627) and 3 months (130 ± 18 vs. 130 ± 11 degrees, P = 0.897) postoperatively. The mean difference in elbow ROM at 2 weeks was 2.6 degrees (95% CI, -8.3 to 13.5). There were no differences in analgesic outcomes, physical function scores, and patient satisfaction up to 3 months postoperatively. Total hospital cost of care was 15% lower in the expedited care pathway group. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that an expedited care pathway with early hospital discharge followed by ambulatory brachial plexus analgesia and continuous passive motion at home is a cost-effective alternative to 72 h of hospital admission after complex arthroscopic elbow surgery.

[Clinical and economical evaluation of new analgesics for the management of chronic pain]. / Valutazione clinica ed economica di nuovi analgesici per la gestione del dolore cronico.

The management of chronic pain still represent a challenge for physicians. Opioids are the main stem in the treatment of chronic severe pain, not only for their potency, but as they act as central drugs. The main limit to their utilization in clinical practice is the prevalence of side effects, in particular in the gastrointestinal tract, whose constipation represents the most common. Two new formulations are nowadays available on the market: tapentadol PR (TAP PR) and oxycodone/naloxone (OXN). A recent meta-analysis showed that both drugs have a better tolerability profile than a tradizional opioid, such as oxycodone CR (OXY CR), but TAP PR reduces by 47% (RR=0.53) the percentage of patients discontinuing treatment because of side effects, compared to 24% (RR=0.76) of OXN. A similar advantage has been reported in the reduction of the risk of developing nausea and/or vomiting: TAP PR reduces the risk by 47% (RR=0.53), while OXN reduces the risk by only by 10% (RR=0.90). Both drugs reduced by about 40% the risk of constipation (RR=0.61 for TAP PR and for OXN). These results have been recently confirmed by a direct comparison of the two formulations (TAP PR vs OXN) in patients with chronic low back pain with neuropathic component. Both drugs were reported to be effective in reducing pain intensity and neuropathic symptoms, however TAP PR resulted superior to OXN in terms of analgesic efficacy, quality of life, and tolerability, in particular regarding constipation and adherence to treatment. A pharmacoeconomic analysis can be useful to understand the costs of these clinical advantages, and can be done by using a probabilistic analisys and by populating a Markov model that simulates the transition in time of 100 patients through 4 different possible health states: 1) still on treatment; 2) presence of adverse events; 3) discontinuation; 4) death. Both treatments (TAP PR and OXN) have been shown to have an excellent cost-effectiveness profile. In the case of OXN, in one year, 0.29 QALYs were gained compared to the use of OXY CR at an additional cost of € 138 resulting in a cost per QALY gained of € 475 (€ 138/0.29). In the case of TAP PR, instead, 0.31 QALYs were gained with additional savings due to the reduction of drug side effects, hospitalizations and emergency department access. Therefore, the use of TAP PR implies an average saving of € 31.6 per patient. These data are the results of a pharmacoeconomic model and require a further validation in clinical practice.

Liver cancer: effects, safety, and cost-effectiveness of controlled-release oxycodone for pain control after TACE.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the analgesic effect, safety, and cost-effectiveness of controlled-release oxycodone (CRO) to control postoperative pain in patients with liver cancer who are undergoing transarterial chemoembolization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, prospective clinical study received institutional review board approval. After written informed consent was obtained, 210 patients with liver cancer were randomized into three groups of 70 patients. Group 1 received 20 mg of CRO, group 2 received 10 mg of CRO, and group 3 received a placebo at 1 hour before transarterial chemoembolization (T(0)) and 12 (T(12)) and 24 (T(24)) hours after T(0). Pain intensity on a numeric rating scale, percentage of patients with each degree of pain, quality of life, adverse reactions, analgesic costs, and hospital stays were evaluated and compared among the three groups. RESULTS: Numeric rating scale scores for pain intensity in group 1 and group 2 were significantly lower than those in group 3 at T(0-12) (P < .001); T(12-24) (P < .001); and T(24-48) (P < .001). When group 1 with group 2 were compared, numeric rating scale scores were significantly lower in group 1 than in group 2 during the period of T(0-12) (P < .001) but were not significantly different at T(12-24) (P = .68) and T(24-48) (P = .10). Analgesic cost and hospital stay were significantly lower in treated groups than in the placebo group. No significant difference was observed in quality of life and adverse events between the treated groups and the placebo group. CONCLUSION: CRO is effective, safe, and cost-effective in the control of postoperative pain after transarterial chemoembolization for patients with inoperable liver cancer.

[Morphine or oxycodone tablets for pain?]. / Morfin eller oksykodon tabletter mot smerter?

The opioids morphine and oxycodone are potent analgesics that are available as extended-release and immediate-release tablets. Indications are the same for both; i.e. severe acute pain and chronic pain (non-malignant or malignant). Few clinical studies have compared morphine and oxycodone directly. There is no evidence to support that one is superior over the other.

Oxycodone versus morphine for cancer pain titration: A systematic review and pharmacoeconomic evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of Oxycodone Hydrochloride Controlled-release Tablets (CR oxycodone) and Morphine Sulfate Sustained-release Tablets (SR morphine) for moderate to severe cancer pain titration. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials meeting the inclusion criteria were searched through Medline, Cochrane Library, Pubmed, EMbase, CNKI,VIP and WanFang database from the data of their establishment to June 2019. The efficacy and safety data were extracted from the included literature. The pain control rate was calculated to eatimate efficacy. Meta-analysis was conducted by Revman5.1.4. A decision tree model was built to simulate cancer pain titration process. The initial dose of CR oxycodone and SR morphine group were 20mg and 30mg respectively. Oral immediate-release morphine was administered to treat break-out pain. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was performed with TreeAge Pro 2019. RESULTS: 19 studies (1680 patients)were included in this study. Meta-analysis showed that the pain control rate of CR oxycodone and SR morphine were 86% and 82.98% respectively. The costs of CR oxycodone and SR morphine were $23.27 and $13.31. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per unit was approximate $329.76. At the willingness-to-pay threshold of $8836, CR oxycodone was cost-effective, while the corresponding probability of being cost-effective at the willingness-to-pay threshold of $300 was 31.6%. One-way sensitivity analysis confirmed robustness of results. CONCLUSIONS: CR oxycodone could be a cost-effective option compared with SR morphine for moderate to severe cancer pain titration in China, according to the threshold defined by the WHO.

Cost-effectiveness of strong opioids focussing on the long-term effects of opioid-related fractures: a model approach.

Opioid analgesics are known to impact on the central nervous system (CNS). These CNS side effects, such as dizziness and confusion, have been shown to lead to an increased risk of falling with subsequent fractures in elderly patients being treated with opioids. The risk of experiencing fractures has been shown to be dependent on the substance administered. Therefore, a health economic model was developed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of the most commonly used strong opioids in Germany, focussing on opioid-related fractures. By means of a Markov model, the consequences of hip, spine and forearm fractures due to the prior administration of transdermal (TD) buprenorphine, TD fentanyl, oral oxycodone as well as oral morphine were assessed from the perspectives of the German statutory health insurance (SHI) and the German social security (GSS) system over a time horizon of 6 years. The most frequently prescribed strength/package-size combinations of these opioids were taken into consideration, including generics where available. The results of the present analysis predict that TD buprenorphine is dominant compared to TD fentanyl and oxycodone by showing better effects [life years gained/quality adjusted life years (QALY) gained] at lower cost. From the SHI perspective, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) compared to morphine is 6,801.61 per life year gained, and 7,766.11 per QALY gained. From the GSS perspective, the ICER is 2,496.77 per life year gained and 2,850.83 per QALY gained. The model is robust regarding probabilistic variations of all parameters in the sensitivity analyses. Focussing on fractures due to the prior administration of strong opioids, TD buprenorphine is less costly and more effective than TD fentanyl and oxycodone and represents a cost-effective treatment option versus morphine in patients with chronic pain from both the SHI and GSS perspective in Germany.

[Cost-effective analysis of rotation from sustained-release morphine tablet to transdermal fentanyl of matrix type or sustained-release oxycodone tablet].

The present study was undertaken to determine the pharmacoeconomics of switching from sustained-release morphine tablet to matrix type (MT) of transdermal fontanel or sustained-release Oxycodone tablet. Cost-effective analysis was performed using a simulation model along with decision analysis. The analysis was done from the payer's perspective. The cost-effective ratio/patient of transdermal MT fontanel (22, 539 yen)was lower than that of sustained -release Oxycodone tablet (23, 630 yen), although a sensitivity analysis could not indicate that this result was reliable. These results suggest the possibility that transdermal MT fontanel was much less expensive than a sustained-release Oxycodone tablet.

The marketing of OxyContin®: A cautionary tale.

This paper provides a review of Purdue Pharma, LP's development and marketing of the long-acting oral narcotic OxyContin®. Within five years of the drug's launch, OxyContin® became the number-one prescribed Schedule II narcotic in the United States. This commercial success was in part the result of a marketing campaign that promoted questionably "distinctive" benefits and minimised the very real dangers of OxyContin®, which include abuse, addiction, overdose, and death. The marketing was based on scientifically invalid or unproven claims of safety and efficacy, inappropriate, off-label marketing, and inadequate warnings. When the FDA belatedly asked for changes to some of the marketing language, Purdue exploited these changes to further marketing objectives and misled healthcare practitioners. This case highlights questions of industry and governmental/regulatory accountability and responsibility for the production, marketing and sale of pharmaceutical products that increase risk while driving enhanced profits.

Evaluation of Patient Migration Patterns and Related Health Care Costs Within a National Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug Plan After Implementation of an Oxycodone HCl Extended-Release Access Restriction.

BACKGROUND: Health plans use formulary restrictions (e.g., prior authorization, step therapy, tier change, nonformulary status) in an effort to control cost and promote quality, safety, and appropriate prescription utilization. Some Medicare payers perceive that the inclusion of certain agents, such as branded oxycodone HCl extended-release tablets (OERs), on their formularies is associated with attracting high-cost members to the plan. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate disenrollment rates, patient migration, and subsequent health care costs among OER users who disenrolled from a national Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug plan (study-MAPD) in the plan year following OER nonformulary restriction. METHODS: A retrospective, longitudinal cohort study using IMS pharmacy and medical claims data between July 1, 2011, and December 31, 2014, was conducted. In the study-MAPD, adults aged ≥ 18 years who were chronic OER users with ≥ 2 OER claims 6 months before the nonformulary restriction date on January 1, 2013 (index date) and with continuous activity in pharmacy and medical claims for 6 months pre- and post-index were included in the study. Comparison years of 2012 and 2014 prerestriction/postrestriction were selected. All groups were followed for 6 months postindex. Year-to-year disenrollment rates of OER patients and the overall plan, as well as patient characteristics and costs of those who disenrolled from and those who remained with the plan, were measured. Costs were compared using a difference-in-differences approach. RESULTS: This study identified 2,935 eligible OER users from the study-MAPD population after imposing nonformulary restrictions on OERs on January 1, 2013. Mean age was 62.1 years, and 59.8% were female. The mean Charlson Comorbidity Index score was 1.83 for those 1,001 patients with medical claims data. For comparison years 2012 (prerestriction) and 2014 (postrestriction), 2,248 and 2,222 OER patients were identified, respectively. Patient characteristics were similar across patient cohorts in all 3 study years. Disenrollment rates for OER users (12.9%, 5.5%, and 14.3% for years 2012, 2013, and 2014, respectively) were lower or similar to those of the overall plan (18.3%, 7.6%, and 14.1%, respectively, for the same 3 years). Approximately 40% of OER users who disenrolled from the study-MAPD migrated to plans also imposing a nonformulary restriction on OERs, while about 25% moved to plans with less restrictive OER coverage. The majority (59.9%) of patients continued OER use irrespective of their disenrollment from the study-MAPD in 2013. Although a nonsignificant decrease ($117; P = 0.340) in per patient per month (PPPM) cost was observed among OER patients postrestriction (from 2012 to 2013), the difference-in-difference analysis indicated a net postrestriction increase of $124 (P = 0.461) in PPPM for OER patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study found little evidence to support any consistent directional effect on patient enrollment behavior as a result of an OER non-formulary restriction. Implementation of an OER nonformulary restriction did not lead to higher OER patient disenrollment or lower patient costs in the study-MAPD. DISCLOSURES: Funding for this study was provided by Purdue Pharma. De, Chen, and Wade are employees of QuintilesIMS, a for-profit company that was contracted by Purdue Pharma to undertake this research. Sweet was a paid consultant for Purdue Pharma at the time of this study. Study concept and design were contributed by Chen, Wade, and De. Chen, De, and Wade collected the data, which were interpreted by all the authors. The manuscript was written by Chen and De, along with Sweet and Wade, and revised by all the authors.

Cost-Effectiveness of Tramadol and Oxycodone in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of incorporating tramadol or oxycodone into knee osteoarthritis (OA) treatment. METHODS: We used the Osteoarthritis Policy Model to evaluate long-term clinical and economic outcomes of knee OA patients with a mean age of 60 years with persistent pain despite conservative treatment. We evaluated 3 strategies: opioid-sparing (OS), tramadol (T), and tramadol followed by oxycodone (T+O). We obtained estimates of pain reduction and toxicity from published literature and annual costs for tramadol ($600) and oxycodone ($2,300) from Red Book Online. Based on published data, in the base case, we assumed a 10% reduction in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) effectiveness in opioid-based strategies. Outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), lifetime cost, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and were discounted at 3% per year. RESULTS: In the base case, T and T+O strategies delayed TKA by 7 and 9 years, respectively, and led to reduction in TKA utilization by 4% and 10%, respectively. Both opioid-based strategies increased cost and decreased QALYs compared to the OS strategy. Tramadol's ICER was highly sensitive to its effect on TKA outcomes. Reduction in TKA effectiveness by 5% (compared to base case 10%) resulted in an ICER for the T strategy of $110,600 per QALY; with no reduction in TKA effectiveness, the ICER was $26,900 per QALY. When TKA was not considered a treatment option, the ICER for T was $39,600 per QALY. CONCLUSION: Opioids do not appear to be cost-effective in OA patients without comorbidities, principally because of their negative impact on pain relief after TKA. The influence of opioids on TKA outcomes should be a research priority.

Economic evaluation of controlled-release oxycodone vs oxycodone-acetaminophen for osteoarthritis pain of the hip or knee.

OBJECTIVE: To examine, in routine practice, the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of oxycodone (OxyContin) compared with standard therapy for osteoarthritis pain. STUDY DESIGN: Open-label active-controlled randomized naturalistic 4-month study of oxycodone vs a combination of oxycodone-acetaminophen (Percocet). METHODS: Outcomes and health resource utilization data were collected by telephone interview. Effectiveness was measured among 485 patients as the proportion having at least 20% improvement from baseline in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index pain score. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated from the Health Utilities Index 3 score. Cost-effectiveness was measured as cost per patient improved and the QALYs gained, using generic oxycodone-acetaminophen in the base case for the healthcare and societal perspectives. Uncertainty was evaluated using multiple 1-way sensitivity analyses and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. RESULTS: Improvement occurred in 62.2% of patients with oxycodone and in 45.9% of patients with oxycodone-acetaminophen (P < .001). After adjustment for baseline differences, 0.0105 QALYs were gained with oxycodone compared with oxycodone-acetaminophen (P = .17). The mean societal costs per patient during 4 months were 7379 US dollars and 7528 US dollars for oxycodone and oxycodone-acetaminophen, respectively (P = .33). Oxycodone was more effective and less costly than oxycodone-acetaminophen based on the societal perspective (including costs associated with time lost). Based on the healthcare perspective (excluding costs associated with time lost), the cost-effectiveness of oxycodone was 4883 US dollars per patient improved and 75,810 US dollars per QALY gained. The base-case results were robust. CONCLUSIONS: From the societal perspective, oxycodone was more effective and less costly than oxycodone-acetaminophen. From the healthcare perspective, oxycodone (compared with generic oxycodone-acetaminophen) fell within the acceptable range of cost-effectiveness between 50,000 US dollars and 100,000 US dollars per QALY gained.

Economic evaluation of Durogesic in moderate to severe, nonmalignant, chronic pain in Germany.

We carried out a cost-effectiveness evaluation of transdermal fentanyl compared to three other widely used opioids: transdermal buprenorphine, sustained-release morphine, and controlled-release oxycodone from a third-party-payers perspective. A decision analytic model with data from a structured database search and from panel data and assumptions was used to derive both cost and utility results. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed to ensure the findings. Transdermal fentanyl patients gain more quality adjusted life-days or quality-adjusted life-years per euro. The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year is 1,625.65 euro for transdermal fentanyl compared to sustained-release morphine and 1,003.03 euro compared to CO, and it is cost-saving compared to transdermal buprenorphine (-203.38 euro per patient). Transdermal fentanyl is thus cost-effective compared to both sustained-release morphine and CO and dominant compared to transdermal buprenorphine in the treatment of adults with nonmalignant moderate to severe chronic pain.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of oxycodone with naloxone versus oxycodone alone for the management of moderate-to-severe pain in patients with opioid-induced constipation in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 20-30% of Canadians suffer from chronic pain. Guidelines for the management of chronic pain support the use of controlled-release (CR) opioids to treat chronic pain. Although effective in managing chronic pain, oxycodone is associated with high rates of opioid-induced constipation (OIC). The cost-effectiveness of a combination of oxycodone for the management of pain and naloxone for the relief of OIC has not previously been evaluated for Canada. METHODS: A decision analytic model was developed to estimate the cost-utility of combination oxycodone/naloxone compared to oxycodone alone in four populations. Drug costs for managing pain and healthcare costs related to managing OIC were included in the analysis and the primary measure of effectiveness was quality adjusted life years (QALYs) derived from OIC rates observed in clinical trials. The analysis was conducted from a healthcare system perspective, used a 1-year time horizon, and results were expressed in 2015 Canadian dollars. RESULTS: In all four patient populations, there was a trade-off between slightly higher total expected costs for Targin treated patients compared to oxycodone treated patients, but also improved clinical benefits in terms of reduced OIC, which resulted in higher QALYs for patients. Although analgesic costs were found to be slightly higher for Targin treated patients, Targin also resulted in cost offsets to the healthcare system in terms of less rescue laxative drug use and other resources required for the management of OIC. The resulting 1-year cost-utility of Targin compared to oxycodone ranged from $2178-$7732 per QALY gained in the base case analysis, and it was found that these cost-utility results remained robust and at low values throughout a series of one-way deterministic analyses of uncertainty. CONCLUSION: The clinical effectiveness of oxycodone/naloxone in managing pain and OIC compared to CR oxycodone alone resulted in low cost-utility estimates.