Medical costs associated with use of systemic therapy in adults with colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: New cytotoxic agents and regimens, as well as immunotherapeutics, have recently been introduced for treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC).  OBJECTIVE: To identify the patient-related and clinical and treatment-related factors associated with higher total health care expenditures in newly diagnosed patients with CRC who are receiving systemic therapy (biologic or chemotherapy) from a commercially insured population.  METHODS: A longitudinal, retrospective analysis was employed to estimate costs and determinants of CRC treatment in a U.S. claims database for health care services used by commercial patients aged 18 to 64 years, who were diagnosed with CRC between January 1, 2005, and June 30, 2009. Generalized linear regression modeling was used to estimate the influence of demographic, clinical, and treatment factors on medical expenditures.  RESULTS: Among the 5,160 patients newly diagnosed with CRC, 99.6% of patients had chemotherapy; 32.6% had biologics; and 85.6% had other pharmaceuticals (excluding the chemotherapy and biologics of interest). The average annualized per patient cost of CRC treatment was $97,400 and consisted of chemotherapy ($17,500), biologics ($30,400), other pharmaceuticals ($2,300), inpatient treatment ($26,300), and outpatient treatment ($42,900). From first line only, first and second lines only, and third+ lines, the cost per patient was $70,500, $100,100, and $152,900, respectively. After adjusting for health care inflation, the average treatment cost of CRC patients increased by 73% from 2005 to 2009. Adjusted analyses showed that the higher medical cost for CRC patients was associated with use of new regimens, metastasis, comorbidities, surgery, radiation, insurance plan, age, sex, and region.   CONCLUSION: The health care cost of CRC treatment is increasing significantly over time, which is most likely caused by the use of new regimens, higher chances of surgery and radiation, and occurrence of various comorbidities and metastatic diseases due to increasing survival time.

Total costs and atrial fibrillation ablation success or failure in Medicare-aged patients in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: This retrospective cohort study compared the direct medical costs of successful versus unsuccessful catheter ablation in Medicare-aged patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), using medical claims data. METHODS: AF patients with > or = 12 months of continuous medical/pharmacy coverage pre- and postablation were identified from the MarketScan Medicare database (January 2003 to December 2006). For study inclusion, patients were required to have > or = 2 AF inpatient/outpatient visits within 6 months and to have received antiarrhythmic drug therapy within 12 months prior to the index ablation. Ablation success was defined as the absence of antiarrhythmic drug therapy 6-12 months postablation. RESULTS: Of 135 patients identified (67% men, mean age 73 years), ablation was successful in 69 (51.1%); most patients (96%) underwent a single procedure. Patients with successful ablation discontinued antiarrhythmic drug treatment after (mean) 54 days. Use of rate-control and anticoagulant drugs decreased after successful ablation, from 87% to 67% and from 86% to 64% of patients, respectively. Among failed ablation patients, 74% versus 70% received rate-control drugs, and 88% versus 82% received anticoagulants pre- versus postablation. Mean +/- SD per-patient procedural costs were $13,655+/-$12,761 for successful compared with $17,294+/-$26,502 (P=0.21) for failed ablation, while AF-related medical costs over 12 months postablation were $2394+/-$642 and $2703+/-$1706, respectively (P<0.001). Overall costs tended to be lower for successful ($16,049+/-$12,536) than for failed ($19,997+/-$13,958) AF ablation (P=0.07). These findings are subject to the limitations imposed by a retrospective database analysis and a small sample size. CONCLUSION: Outside the clinical-trial setting, catheter ablation for second-line treatment of AF proved unsuccessful in half of Medicare-aged patients. Direct medical costs did not differ significantly between patients with failed and successful ablations. The high rate and costs of AF ablation failure in the Medicare-aged population reinforce the need for better understanding of prognostic factors for ablation outcome.