A cost-consequence analysis of the Xpert Xpress CoV-2/Flu/RSV plus test strategy for the diagnosis of influenza-like illnesses.

AIMS: Influenza-like illnesses (ILI) affect millions each year in the United States (US). Determining definitively the cause of symptoms is important for patient management. Xpert Xpress CoV-2/Flu/RSV plus (Xpert Xpress) is a rapid, point-of-care (POC), multiplex real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test intended for the simultaneous qualitative detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A/B, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). The objective of our analysis was to develop a cost-consequence model (CCM) demonstrating the clinico-economic impacts of implementing PCR testing with Xpert Xpress compared to current testing strategies. METHODS: A decision tree model, with a 1-year time horizon, was used to compare testing with Xpert Xpress alone to antigen POC testing and send-out PCR strategies in the US outpatient setting from a payer perspective. A hypothetical cohort of 1,000,000 members was modeled, a portion of whom develop symptomatic ILIs and present to an outpatient care facility. Our main outcome measure is cost per correct treatment course. RESULTS: The total cost per correct treatment course was $1,131 for the Xpert Xpress strategy compared with a range of $3,560 to $5,449 in comparators. POC antigen testing strategies cost more, on average, than PCR strategies. LIMITATIONS: Simplifying model assumptions were used to allow for modeling ease. In clinical practice, treatment options, costs, and diagnostic test sensitivity and specificity may differ from what is included in the model. Additionally, the most recent incidence and prevalence data was used within the model, which is not reflective of historical averages due to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. CONCLUSION: The Xpert Xpress CoV-2/Flu/RSV plus test allows for rapid and accurate diagnostic results, leading to reductions in testing costs and downstream healthcare resource utilization compared to other testing strategies. Compared to POC antigen testing strategies, PCR strategies were more efficient due to improved diagnostic accuracy and reduced use of confirmatory testing.

Health Economics of Selective Early Rescue Surfactant Administration and Standard Surfactant Administration for Newborns With Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the effect of early rescue surfactant administration techniques for preterm infants with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) from a health care delivery system perspective. METHODS: A cost-consequence model was developed based on previously published literature to compare the health economic impact of implementing early surfactant administration strategies vs standard surfactant administration via endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation (MV). RESULTS: Early rescue surfactant treatment strategies are associated with a decrease in the number of patients requiring MV, cumulative MV days, and rate of neonatal complications. Total annual surfactant costs are higher than standard surfactant administration, but this is offset by savings in total hospital and complication costs. CONCLUSIONS: This cost-consequence analysis suggests selective early rescue surfactant administration strategies are associated with a lower health care burden in premature infants with RDS.

Bleeding in patients with hemophilia who have inhibitors: Modeling US medical system utilization and cost avoidance between recombinant factor VIIa products with different clinical dosing requirements.

BACKGROUND: A mainstay of treatment in patients with hemophilia with inhibitors (PWIs) is the use of a recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) bypassing agent. A new rFVIIa product may allow reduced rFVIIa utilization for on-demand treatment of bleeding episodes (BEs). OBJECTIVE: A decision analytic health economic model was developed to compare the utilization and consequent need for bleed-related clinical encounters of 2 rFVIIa products, with the International Nomenclature Name of eptacog alfa (EA) and eptacog beta (EB). METHODS: This study uses recent, peer-reviewed, and published data from clinical trials with similar endpoints for 1 million insured male lives in the United States. rFVIIa product utilization was modeled in hemophilia (A and B) PWI for on-demand treatment of BEs with rFVIIa treatment. Estimated annual BE rates were modeled to include prophylaxis and on-demand management. The clinical encounter avoidance estimates are based on refractory bleeding through 24 hours. RESULTS: In a cohort of 1 million insured, 5-6 patients with hemophilia A or B with inhibitors annually receive on-demand treatment for a total of 59 mild/moderate BEs. The model suggests that EB requires less unit utilization per BE (13,125 µg and 17,850 µg for the 75µg/kg and 225µg/kg dose regimens, respectively) than EA 90 µg/kg dosing (20,178µg), with wholesale acquisition costs expanding the difference. Further, both EB initial dose regimens would permit decreased total nonmedication health plan spending for the acute treatment of BEs by reducing the need for clinical encounters arising from BEs that fail to respond within 24 hours. CONCLUSIONS: With reduced infusion requirements, the model consistently shows that EB could generate lower insured-cohort drug utilization, as well as reduce costly clinical encounters by keeping mild and moderate BEs amenable to home bypassing agent management. DISCLOSURES: The article was funded by HEMA Biologic, LLC. The authors approved all content and results in this article without being subject to sponsor censorship. Mr Jensen, Mr Cyr, and Ms Hathway are employees of PRECISIONheor, which provides consulting services to the pharmaceutical industry, including HEMA Biologics, LLC. Dr Batt is an advisor to PRECISIONheor. Dr Alexander is a former employee of HEMA Biologics, LLC, and provides consulting services to the pharmaceutical industry.

Cost-Consequence Analysis of Using Cangrelor in High Angiographic Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Patients: A US Hospital Perspective.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate a US hospital's cost implications and outcomes of cangrelor use in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients with two or more angiographic high-risk features (HRFs), including avoidance of oral P2Y12 inhibitor pretreatment in patients requiring cardiac surgery. Intravenous cangrelor provides direct, immediate onset and rapid-offset P2Y12 inhibition, which may reduce the necessity for oral P2Y12 pretreatment. METHODS: A decision analytic model was developed, estimating the annual impact over 3 years of cangrelor availability. Ischemic and bleeding events (48 h) from randomized clinical trial data were extrapolated to 30 days. Event costs were from the CHAMPION PHOENIX Economics substudy. Rates of coronary artery disease (CAD) presentation, PCI, oral P2Y12 pretreatment, and inpatient hospitalization costs were from published literature and clinical experts. Scenario analyses evaluated the impact of cangrelor availability on potential reduced P2Y12 pretreatment rates by 50-100%. Drug costs were 2019 wholesale acquisition costs and, where necessary, all costs were adjusted to 2019 dollars. RESULTS: In a hospital treating 1000 CAD PCI inpatients annually, increasing cangrelor use from 11 to 32% resulted in a reduction in 48-h ischemic events/year by 5.7%, while bleeding events increased by 2.9%. Total costs of $1,135,472 declined 12.8%, with a 50% reduction in P2Y12 pretreatment or 30% with no pretreatment. Savings were driven by a decrease in ischemic events, decrease in glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor use, and less need for and shorter oral P2Y12 inhibitor washout period for surgery patients. CONCLUSION: Use of cangrelor in patients with two or more angiographic HRFs may improve outcomes and lower hospital budgets, mainly from avoiding surgery delays necessitated by oral P2Y12 inhibitor pretreatment.

The impact of increasing multitarget stool DNA use among colorectal cancer screeners in a self-insured US employer population.

Background: In the United States (US), colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths. With the majority of the US population covered by employer-based health plans, employers can play a critical role in increasing CRC screening adherence, which may help avert CRC-related deaths. Therefore, it is important for self-insured employers to consider the impact of appropriate utilization of CRC screening options. Objective: To evaluate the impact of increasing multitarget stool DNA [mt-sDNA (Cologuard®)] use among CRC screeners from the perspective of a US self-insured employer. Methods:A 5-year Markov model was developed to quantify the budget impact of increasing mt-sDNA from 6% to 15% among average-risk screeners using colonoscopy, fecal immunological test, and mt-sDNA. Data on direct medical costs were obtained from published literature, Medicare CPT codes, and the Healthcare cost and Utilization project. Indirect costs included productivity loss due to workplace absenteeism for CRC screening and treatment. Results: With a hypothetical population of 100,000 employees with screeners aged 50-64 years, compared to status quo, increased mt-sDNA utilization resulted in no differences in the numbers of cancers detected and the overall direct and indirect cost savings were ~$214,000 ($0.04 per-employee-per-month) over 5 years. Most of the savings were due to a reduction in the direct medical expenditure related to CRC screening, adverse events, and productivity loss due to colonoscopy screening. Similar results were observed in the model simulation among screeners aged 45-64 years. Conclusion: Increased utilization of mt-sDNA for CRC screening averts direct and indirect medical costs from a self-insured US employer perspective.

The health economic impact of varying levels of adherence to colorectal screening on providers and payers.

AIMS: To examine the impact of increasing multi-target stool DNA test (mt-sDNA [Cologuard]) utilization for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in cohorts aged 50-75 and 45-75 years old with varying levels of adherence from the perspectives of integrated delivery networks (IDNs) and payers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed a budget impact model that simulates CRC screening with colonoscopy over a 10-year time horizon, fecal immunochemical test (FIT), and mt-sDNA according to the United States Preventive Services Task Force and American Cancer Society guidelines for average risk adults. We evaluated varying levels of screening adherence for a status quo scenario and for an increased mt-sDNA utilization scenario, from the IDN and payer perspectives. The IDN perspective included CRC screening program costs, whereas the payer perspective did not. Conversely, stool-based screening test and bowel preparation costs were unique to the payer perspective. RESULTS: The increased mt-sDNA scenarios yielded cost savings relative to the status quo under all adherence scenarios due to a decrease in screening and surveillance colonoscopies. For ages 50-75, in high and low adherence scenarios, savings were $19.8 M ($0.16 per-person-per-month (PPPM)) and $33.3 M ($0.28 PPPM) from the IDN perspective. From the payer perspective, savings were $4.2 M ($0.03 PPPM) and $6.7 M ($0.06 PPPM). For ages 45-75, in high and low adherence scenarios, cost savings were $19.3 M ($0.16 PPPM) and $33.0 M ($0.28 PPPM) from the IDN perspective and $3.9 M ($0.03 PPPM) and $6.2 M ($0.05 PPPM) from the payer perspective. In all imperfect adherence scenarios, the degree of cost-savings with increased mt-sDNA utilization correlated with the aggregate decrease in screening and surveillance colonoscopies. LIMITATIONS: Estimates of real-world adherence levels were based on cross-sectional screening data from the literature, and assumptions were applied to individual screening modalities and screening scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: Among all adherence scenarios, perspectives, and age ranges, increased mt-sDNA utilization yielded cost-savings.

An updated cost-utility model for onasemnogene abeparvovec (Zolgensma®) in spinal muscular atrophy type 1 patients and comparison with evaluation by the Institute for Clinical and Effectiveness Review (ICER).

Background: Recent cost-utility analysis (CUA) models for onasemnogene abeparvovec (Zolgensma®, formerly AVXS-101) in spinal muscular atrophy type 1 (SMA1) differ on key assumptions and results. Objective: To compare the manufacturer's proprietary CUA model to the model published by the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), and to update the manufacturer's model with long-term follow-up data and some key ICER assumptions. Study design: We updated a recent CUA evaluating value for money in cost per incremental Quality-adjusted Life Year (QALY) of onasemnogene abeparvovec versus nusinersen (Spinraza®) or best supportive care (BSC) in symptomatic SMA1 patients, and compared it to the ICER model. Setting/Perspective: USA/Commercial payer Participants: Children aged <2 years with SMA1. Interventions: Onasemnogene abeparvovec, a single-dose gene replacement therapy, versus nusinersen, an antisense oligonucleotide, versus BSC. Main outcome measure: Incremental-cost effectiveness ratio and value-based price using traditional thresholds for general medicines in the US. Results: Updated survival (undiscounted) predicted by the model was 37.60 years for onasemnogene abeparvovec compared to 12.10 years for nusinersen and 7.27 years for BSC. Updated quality-adjusted survival using ICER's utility scores and discounted at 3% were 13.33, 2.85, and 1.15 discounted QALYs for onasemnogene abeparvovec, nusinersen, and BSC, respectively. Using estimated net prices, the discounted lifetime cost/patient was $3.93 M for onasemnogene abeparvovec, $4.60 M for nusinersen, and $1.96 M for BSC. The incremental cost per QALY gained for onasemnogene abeparvovec was dominant against nusinersen and $161,648 against BSC. These results broadly align with the results of the ICER model, which predicted a cost per QALY gained of $139,000 compared with nusinersen, and $243,000 compared with BSC (assuming a placeholder price of $2 M for onasemnogene abeparvovec), differences in methodology notwithstanding. Exploratory analyses in presymptomatic patients were similar. Conclusion: This updated CUA model is similar to ICER analyses comparing onasemnogene abeparvovec with nusinersen in the symptomatic and presymptomatic SMA populations. At a list price of $2.125 M, onasemnogene abeparvovec is cost-effective compared to nusinersen for SMA1 patients treated before age 2 years. When compared to BSC, cost per QALY of onasemnogene abeparvovec is higher than commonly used thresholds for therapies in the USA ($150,000 per QALY).

Cost-consequence analysis of 18F-fluciclovine for the staging of recurrent prostate cancer.

Background: Current detection methodologies are often unable to identify the location and extent of recurrent prostate cancer (PCa) leading potentially to 'futile' local therapies in the presence of metastatic disease. The use of 18 F-fluciclovine PET/CT may lead to better patient management. Objective: The aim of this study was to quantify the economic impact and cost-consequence of using 18 F-fluciclovine PET/CT in PCa recurrence. Study design: A decision analytic model based on recurrent PCa imaging guidelines. Setting: US hospital. Participants: PCa patients experiencing biochemical recurrence. Intervention: 18 F-fluciclovine PET/CT was compared to conventional imaging. Main outcome measure: Budget impact, correct diagnoses, futile treatments, and cost-consequence (cost per correct diagnosis) Results: For a hypothetical hospital serving 500,000 individuals, the model showed the use of 18 F-fluciclovine reduced 'futile' therapies by 19.2%. Re-imaging costs were reduced by 40.2% ($8.2 million); however, when assuming diagnostic and staging costs only, the total costs increased from $31.2 to $34.6 million (10.9%), driven by 18 F-fluciclovine imaging agent and procedure costs. The cost per 'correct' diagnosis declined $30,673 (46.8%). When including subsequent 5-year patient management, the cost per 'correct' diagnosis declined $410,206 (49.2%). Conclusion: 18 F-fluciclovine PET/CT imaging may improve the clinical management of men with recurrent PCa with minimal increase in healthcare spending.

Projecting total costs and health consequences of increasing mt-sDNA utilization for colorectal cancer screening from the payer and integrated delivery network perspectives.

Aims: To evaluate total costs and health consequences of a colorectal cancer (CRC) screening program with colonoscopy, fecal immunochemical tests (FIT), and expanded use of multitarget stool DNA (mt-sDNA) from the perspectives of Integrated Delivery Networks (IDNs) and payers in the United States.Materials and methods: We developed a budget impact and cost-consequence model that simulates CRC screening for eligible 50- to 75-year-old adults. A status quo scenario and an increased mt-sDNA scenario were modeled. The status quo includes the current screening mix of colonoscopy (83%), FIT (11%), and mt-sDNA (6%) modalities. The increased mt-sDNA scenario increases mt-sDNA utilization to 28% over 10 years. Costs for both the IDN and the payer perspectives incorporated diagnostic and surveillance colonoscopies, adverse events (AEs), and CRC treatment. The IDN perspective included screening program costs, composed of direct nonmedical (e.g. patient navigation) and indirect (e.g. administration) costs. It was assumed that IDNs do not incur the costs for stool-based screening tests or bowel preparation for colonoscopies.Results: In a population of one million covered lives, the 10-year incremental cost savings incurred by increasing mt-sDNA utilization was $16.2 M for the IDN and $3.3 M for the payer. The incremental savings per-person-per-month were $0.14 and $0.03 for the IDN and payer, respectively. For both perspectives, increased diagnostic colonoscopy costs were offset by reductions in screening colonoscopies, surveillance colonoscopies, and AEs. Extending screening eligibility to 45- to 75-year-olds slightly decreased the overall cost savings.Limitations: The natural history of CRC was not simulated; however, many of the utilized parameters were extracted from highly vetted natural history models or published literature. Direct nonmedical and indirect costs for CRC screening programs are applied on a per-person-per modality basis, whereas in reality some of these costs may be fixed.Conclusions: Increased mt-sDNA utilization leads to fewer colonoscopies, less AEs, and lower overall costs for both IDNs and payers, reducing overall screening program costs and increasing the number of cancers detected while maintaining screening adherence rates over 10 years.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of using onasemnogene abeparvocec (AVXS-101) in spinal muscular atrophy type 1 patients.

Background: Spinal muscular atrophy type 1 (SMA1) is a devastating genetic disease for which gene-replacement therapy may bring substantial survival and quality of life benefits. Objective: This study investigated the cost-effectiveness of onasemnogene abeparvovec (AVXS-101) gene-replacement therapy for SMA1. Study design: A Markov model was used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as cost/quality-adjusted life year ($/QALY), of AVXS-101 versus nusinersen over a lifetime. Survival, healthcare costs and QALYs were estimated using natural history data for SMA patients who achieved motor milestones (sitting/walking). Health utility weights were obtained from the CHERISH trial. Setting: USA; commercial payer perspective Participants: SMA1 infants Interventions: AVXS-101 was compared to nusinersen. Main outcome measure: The primary outcome was the ICER. Results: Expected survival (undiscounted) over a lifetime predicted by the model was 37.20 life years for AVXS-101 and 9.68 for nusinersen (discounted QALYs, 15.65 and 5.29, respectively). Using a potential AVXS-101 price range ($2.5-5.0M/treatment), the average lifetime cost/patient was $4.2-6.6M for AVXS-101 and $6.3M for nusinersen. The ICER range was (-$203,072) to $31,379 per QALY gained for AVXS-101 versus nusinersen, indicating that AVXS-101 was cost-effective with prices of ≤$5M. Conclusion: Single-dose AVXS-101 was cost-effective compared to chronic nusinersen for SMA1 patients.

Budget Impact Analysis of Using Daunorubicin-Cytarabine Liposome in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Therapy-Related AML or AML and Myelodysplasia-Related Changes.

BACKGROUND: Current national estimates for acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) indicate this disease accounts for 1.1% of new cancer diagnoses and 1.8% of cancer deaths in the United States. The 5-year overall survival rate for patients with AML was 27.4% between 2008 and 2014. The standard induction for patients with AML includes cytarabine, infused for 7 days, with 3 once-daily injections of an anthracycline, such as daunorubicin, known as the 7+3 regimen. Daunorubicin plus cytarabine liposomal encapsulation for injection was approved in the United States in 2017 for adults with newly diagnosed therapy-related AML (tAML) or AML with myelodysplasia-related changes (AML-MRC). OBJECTIVE: To estimate the annual budget impact of introducing daunorubicin-cytarabine liposome as induction treatment for patients with tAML or AML-MRC in the United States over a 3-year period. METHODS: The model consisted of a simple decision analytic framework for a 1- to 3-year period. We used an incidence-based approach to estimate the annual number of patients newly diagnosed with tAML or AML-MRC in a hypothetical 1-million-member plan. Patients were allocated to 2 groups based on when daunorubicin-cytarabine liposome became available, with the base-case group allocated to the 7+3 regimen, and another group allocated to daunorubicin-cytarabine liposome treatment. The incidence of AML was estimated as 4.3 per 100,000 people. Efficacy measures included the proportion of complete responders, proportion of patients who had undergone transplantation, and survival at 180 and 365 days. Inpatient drug and hospitalization costs were based on diagnosis-related group rates, and outpatient drug costs on wholesale acquisition costs. RESULTS: Based on this hypothetical 1-million-member health plan, 15.1 members would receive intensive induction for newly diagnosed tAML or AML-MRC annually. Increasing the use of daunorubicin-cytarabine liposome (assumption of year 1, 20%; year 2, 50%; year 3, 80%) resulted in a 3-year incremental cumulative budget impact of $72,041 (1.7% increase for patients with tAML or AML-MRC), with a per-member per-month cost of $0.0032 at year 3. Over a 3-year period, the use of daunorubicin-cytarabine liposome would result in an estimated increase in the number of patients with a complete response to therapy by 2.72 (23.1%), which would lead to an incremental cost decrease of $179,956 per responding patient compared with the use of the 7+3 regimen in the base-case group. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these results, induction treatment with daunorubicin-cytarabine liposome for patients with tAML or AML-MRC instead of the 7+3 regimen may have a limited economic impact on the budget of commercial health plans and may result in cost offsets, particularly in patients who respond to therapy.

Evaluating cost benefits of combination therapies for advanced melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Although a number of monoimmunotherapies and targeted therapies are available to treat BRAF+ advanced melanoma, response rates remain relatively low in the range of 22-53% with progression-free survival (PFS) in the range of 4.8-8.8 months. Recently, combination targeted therapies have improved response rates to about 66-69%, PFS to 11.0-12.6 months and overall survival (OS) to 25.1-25.6 months. While combination immunotherapies have improved response rates of 67 compared with 19-29% with monotherapies and improved PFS of 11.7 compared with 4.4-5.8 months with monotherapies, the OS benefit is yet to be established in phase 3 trials. As healthcare costs continue to rise, US payers have a predominant interest in assessing the value of available treatments. Therefore, a cost-benefit model was developed to evaluate the value of treating BRAF+ advanced melanoma with two combination therapies: nivolumab + ipilimumab (N+I) and dabrafenib + trametinib (D+T). SCOPE: The model was used to estimate total costs, total costs by expenditure category, cost per month of PFS and cost per responder for the payer, and societal perspectives of treating advanced melanoma patients with the BRAF V600 mutation using combination targeted therapy (D+T) or combination immunotherapy (N+I). The model followed patients from initiation of treatment to the point of progression or death. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the robustness of the results and to understand the dispersion of simulated results. FINDINGS: Based on a hypothetical payer with one million covered lives, it was expected that fourteen metastatic melanoma patients with the BRAF V600 mutation would be treated each year. Cost-benefit with N+I and D+T was simulated from the payer perspective. The cost per month of PFS for N+I was $22,162, while that for D+T was $17,716 (-$4,446 cost difference); the cost per responder for N+I was $388,746 and that for D+T was $282,429 (-$106,316 cost difference). The cost per month of PFS and per responder from the societal perspective resembled the patterns observed from the payer's perspective: the cost per month of PFS for N+I was $22,843, while that for D+T was $18,283 (-$4,560 cost difference). The cost per responder for N+I was $400,695 and that for D+T was $291,473 (-$109,222 cost difference). The totals of travel and treatment time for N+I and D+T were 58 hours and 3.9 hours per patient, respectively, of which total infusion time for N+I accounted for a majority - 59% - of the 58 hours. Sensitivity analyses indicated that results were most sensitive to model inputs for median PFS, body weight, and drug cost. Moreover, D+T is likely associated with a lower cost per month of PFS and cost per responder than N+I, except at low body weights (less than 57 kg). CONCLUSION: The model presented in this study was used to analyze the clinical and economic benefit of using combination therapies in advanced melanoma patients with the BRAF V600 mutation. This analysis suggests D+T therapy is associated with less patient time and lower costs relative to N+I to gain similar PFS and overall response rate (ORR) benefits.

Use of Oritavancin in Moderate-to-Severe ABSSSI Patients Requiring IV Antibiotics: A U.S. Payer Budget Impact Analysis.

BACKGROUND: It is estimated that acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) account for nearly 10% of hospital admissions and 3.4-3.8 million emergency department visits per year in the United States. Analyses of hospital discharge records indicate 74% of ABSSSI admissions involve empiric treatment with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) active antibiotics. Analysis has shown that payer costs could be reduced if moderate-to-severe ABSSSI patients were treated to a greater extent in the observational unit followed by discharge to outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT). Oritavancin is a lipoglycopeptide antibiotic with bactericidal activity against gram-positive bacteria, including MRSA. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the impact on a U.S. payer's budget of using single-dose oritavancin in ABSSSI patients with suspected MRSA involvement who are indicated for intravenous antibiotics. METHODS: A decision analytic model based on current clinical practice was developed to estimate the economic value of decreased hospital resource consumption by using single-dose oritavancin over a 1-year time horizon. Use of antibiotics was informed by an analysis of the Premier Research Database. Demographic and clinical data were derived from a targeted literature review. Emergency department, observation, laboratory, and administration costs used were Medicare National Limitation amounts. Drug costs were 2014 wholesale acquisition costs. RESULTS: For a hypothetical U.S. payer with 1,000,000 members, it is expected that approximately 14,285 members per year will be diagnosed with ABSSSI severe enough to indicate intravenous antibiotics with MRSA activity. Based on this simulation, use of single-dose oritavancin in 26% of these patients was estimated to reduce the number of inpatient admissions, reduce length of stay for patients requiring admission, and reduce the number of days a patient needs to receive daily infusions in the OPAT clinic. The total patient days decreased from 171,125 to 133,435 with a total annual budget impact of -$12,550,000 or -$1.05 per member per month (PMPM). Total inpatient and outpatient costs were reduced by $9,970,000 (19.7%) and $2,580,000 (4.2%), respectively. Inpatient cost savings were derived from a reduction in admissions, length of stay, and lower drug administration burden. Outpatient costs were reduced by lower drug administration burden in the OPAT setting. A sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the model was most sensitive to population estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Use of single-dose oritavancin in moderate-to-severe ABSSSI patients, including those with suspected MRSA, was projected to deliver an estimated cost reduction to U.S. payers of $1.05 PMPM by avoiding hospitalization in appropriate patients and reducing outpatient costs associated with multiday parenteral antibiotic therapy. DISCLOSURES: This work was funded by The Medicines Company. Jensen, Wu, and Cyr are employees of ICON Health Economics, which provides consulting services to the biopharmaceutical industry, including The Medicines Company. Fan and Sulman are employees and shareholders of The Medicines Company. Dufour and Lodise have provided consulting services to The Medicines Company. Nicolau provided model input but did not receive an honorarium for contributions on this project. Nicolau is a speaker for The Medicines Company. Study concept and design were contributed by Jensen and Wu, along with the other authors. Jensen, Wu, Fan, and Sulham collected the data, with assistance from Cyr. Data interpretation was performed by Sulham, Jensen, Wu, and Fan, assisted by Lodise, Nicolau, and Dufour. The manuscript was written by Jensen, Wu, and Sulham, with assistance from Cyr, and revised by Lodise, Nicolau, and Dufour, with assistance from the other authors.

Use of Oritavancin in Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections Patients Receiving Intravenous Antibiotics: A US Hospital Budget Impact Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Nearly 10% of all US hospital admissions are attributed to acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs). While most antibacterials used to treat these infections require multi-day and multi-dose regimens, a single-dose treatment is now available. The objective of this analysis is to estimate the annual budget impact of using single-dose oritavancin in patients with moderate to severe ABSSSIs receiving intravenous methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)-active antibacterials from a US hospital perspective. METHODS: A decision-analytic model based on current clinical practice was developed to estimate the economic impact of oritavancin. Utilization of antibacterials and rates of hospital admission were derived from the Premier Research Database. Demographic and clinical data were informed by the published literature and 2014 wholesale drug acquisition costs were used. Other costs were based on the published literature and Medicare National Limitation amounts. All costs were inflated to 2014 US dollars. Two base-case scenarios were considered: one for hospitals with ambulatory services and one for hospitals without ambulatory services. RESULTS: For a US hospital with ambulatory services with 1000 ABSSSI patients receiving intravenous MRSA antibiotics annually, use of oritavancin in 26% of patients is estimated to reduce the total annual budget by 12.9% (US$1.23 million), or approximately US$1234.67 per patient. Total inpatient costs will be reduced by 22.3% (US$1.40 million) and outpatient costs will increase slightly by 1.7% (US$55,310). Pharmaceutical cost increases are offset by savings in the inpatient setting from fewer hospital admissions. Hospitals without ambulatory services are estimated to receive overall cost savings of 9.3% (US$0.63 million). CONCLUSION: Use of single-dose oritavancin in select ABSSSI patients with suspected or confirmed MRSA involvement is estimated to save US hospitals approximately 9.3-12.9% per year by reducing hospital admissions and lowering drug administration burden.