Healthcare Resources Utilization and Costs of Patients with Non-IPF Progressive Fibrosing Interstitial Lung Disease Based on Insurance Claims in the USA.

INTRODUCTION: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is the classic progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease (ILD), but some patients with ILDs other than IPF also develop a progressive fibrosing phenotype (PF-ILD). Information on use and cost of healthcare resources in patients with PF-ILD is limited. METHODS: We used USA-based medical insurance claims (2014-2016) to assess use and cost of healthcare resources in PF-ILD. Patients with at least two ILD claims and at least one pulmonologist visit were considered to have ILD. Pulmonologist visit frequency was used as a proxy to identify PF-ILD (at least four visits in 2016, or at least three more visits in 2016 vs. 2014). RESULTS: Of 2517 patients with non-IPF ILD, 15% (n = 373) had PF-ILD. Mean annual medical costs associated with ILD claims were $35,364 in patients with non-IPF PF-ILD versus $20,211 in the non-IPF ILD population. In 2016, patients with non-IPF PF-ILD made more hospital ILD claims than patients with non-IPF ILD (10.5 vs. 4.7). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest higher disease severity and overall healthcare use for patients with a non-IPF ILD manifesting a progressive fibrosing phenotype (non-IPF PF-ILD).

Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is a group of similar lung conditions with lung fibrosis, scarring, or inflammation of the lung tissue. Some patients with ILD also have worsening lung fibrosis, referred to as "progressive fibrosis" (PF-ILD). The most common type of PF-ILD is idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), which has no known cause. Although much is known about IPF, there is limited information available on how often patients with ILDs other than IPF (non-IPF ILD) use healthcare, or the costs associated with the disease. This study used US medical insurance claims to gain further insights. The study examined data from over 2500 patients with non-IPF ILD, of which 15% had PF-ILD. Patients defined as having PF-ILD had higher yearly medical costs and used healthcare services more often than other patients with ILD. This study highlights the economic burden of non-IPF ILD with progressive fibrosis (non-IPF PF-ILD).

Economic burden of patients affected by non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): the LIFE study.

PURPOSE: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a condition with significant clinical burden for patients and relevant economic impact. Limited evidence exists on the management costs of NSCLC patients, especially in the late phases of the disease. The main objective of this analysis was to evaluate the economic impact of clinical management of NSCLC patients in the Italian population. METHODS: This evaluation was an economic analysis of the observational and multicentre study LIFE, which described the therapeutic approach in routine clinical practice for NSCLC patients, progressing after first-line treatment. This study evaluated resource consumption in different Italian hospitals, including specialist visits, hospitalizations, accesses to first aid, pharmacological treatment, laboratory tests and palliative care. The National Healthcare Service perspective was adopted. RESULTS: In this study, N = 191 patients enrolled in the LIFE study were included. Patients were aged 64.2 years and were predominantly males (66%). In the different line of treatments, monthly costs of patients ranged between €1471 (first line) and €1788 (third line). The overall healthcare cost over the average period of observation (16.4 months) was €25,859 per patient. Overall, oncology therapy was the cost driver, although the composition of medical costs changed across the different lines of treatment, with costs for concomitant medication and palliative care being predominant in late phase of the disease. CONCLUSIONS: The economic burden of NSCLC is extremely high during the overall period of treatment, and a significant level of care is required in each stage of the disease.

Development of an enhanced health-economic model and cost-effectiveness analysis of tiotropium + olodaterol Respimat® fixed-dose combination for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients in Italy.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of the fixed-dose combination (FDC) of tiotropium + olodaterol Respimat(®) FDC with tiotropium alone for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the Italian health care setting using a newly developed patient-level Markov model that reflects the current understanding of the disease. METHODS: While previously published models have largely been based around a cohort approach using a Markov structure and GOLD stage stratification, an individual-level Markov approach was selected for the new model. Using patient-level data from the twin TOnado trials assessing Tiotropium + olodaterol Respimat(®) FDC versus tiotropium, outcomes were modelled based on the trough forced expiratory volume (tFEV1) of over 1000 patients in each treatment arm, tracked individually at trial visits through the 52-week trial period, and after the trial period it was assumed to decline at a constant rate based on disease stage. Exacerbation risk was estimated based on a random-effects logistic regression analysis of exacerbations in UPLIFT. Mortality by age and disease stage was estimated from an analysis of TIOSPIR trial data. Cost of bronchodilators and other medications, routine management, and costs of treatment for moderate and severe exacerbations for the Italian setting were included. A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted over a 15-year time horizon from the perspective of the Italian National Health Service. RESULTS: Aggregating total costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for each treatment cohort over 15 years and comparing tiotropium + olodaterol Respimat(®) FDC with tiotropium alone, resulted in mean incremental costs per patient of €1167 and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €7518 per additional QALY with tiotropium + olodaterol Respimat(®) FDC. The lung function outcomes observed for tiotropium + olodaterol Respimat(®) FDC in TOnado drove the results in terms of slightly higher mean life-years (12.24 versus 12.07) exacerbation-free months (11.36 versus 11.32) per patient and slightly fewer moderate and severe exacerbations per patient-year (0.411 versus 0.415; 0.21 versus 0.24) versus tiotropium. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed tiotropium + olodaterol Respimat(®) FDC to be the more cost-effective treatment in 95.2% and 98.4% of 500 simulations at thresholds of €20,000 and €30,000 per QALY respectively. CONCLUSION: Tiotropium + olodaterol Respimat(®) FDC is a cost-effective bronchodilator in the maintenance treatment of COPD for the Italian health care system.