RESUMEN
The aim of this study is to compare discontinuation risk and health care resource utilization between vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in newly treated patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Based on administrative databases of five Italian Local Healthcare Units, all patients with a discharge diagnosis of NVAF between 2011 and 2014 were selected. Among them, the incident users of NOACs and VKAs in 2014 were followed-up to from the first prescription date to the occurrence of anyone of the following events: a 90-day gap in therapy, switch to a different molecule or add-on of a different molecule into the regimen, death of patient, end of follow-up (December 2015). All-cause hospitalizations, outpatient visits and examinations within the persistence period were also evaluated. The final cohort was composed of 2909 and 765 incident users of VKA and NOACs, respectively. Cox regression to model time to non-persistence within 12 months showed a 62% reduction in risk of drug discontinuation in NOAC patients compared to VKA patients (HR,0.38 [0.33-0.44]). In the adjusted analyses with warfarin as reference, apixaban patients (HR, 0.35 [0.24-0.50]) had the lowest risk of non-persistence, followed by rivaroxoban (HR, 0.42 [0.33-0.54]) and dabigatran users (HR, 0.51 [0.43-0.61]). The mean total numbers of all-cause hospitalization records in 12-month persistent patients were significantly less in NOACs users compared with VKA users (0.36 vs 0.47, p-value:0.03). Similarly, the differences in the mean numbers of all-cause visits and examinations were statistically significant between VKA and NOAC patients, who registered on average 2.33 vs 1.84 visits (p-value: 0.01) and 24.4 vs 9.2 exams referrals (p-value: <0.0001), respectively. NOACs showed a better profile in terms of both resource utilization and persistence compared with VKAs. In particular, apixaban returned the lowest risk of discontinuation than dabigatran and rivaroxaban.
Asunto(s)
Anticoagulantes/administración & dosificación , Fibrilación Atrial/tratamiento farmacológico , Cumplimiento de la Medicación/estadística & datos numéricos , Vitamina K/antagonistas & inhibidores , Administración Oral , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Anticoagulantes/farmacología , Estudios de Cohortes , Bases de Datos Factuales , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Recursos en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Italia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this analysis was to provide an estimate of drug utilization indicators (persistence, switch rate and drug consumption) on biologics and the corresponding costs (drugs, admissions and specialist care) incurred by the Italian National Health Service in the management of adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: We conducted an observational retrospective cohort analysis using the administrative databases of three local health units. We considered all patients aged ≥18 years with a diagnosis of RA and at least one biologic drug prescription between January 2010 and December 2012 (recruitment period). Persistence was defined as maintenance over the last 3 months of the follow-up period of the same biological therapy administered at the index date. A switch was defined as the presence of a biological therapy other than that administered at the index date during the last 3 months of the follow-up period. Hospital admissions (with a diagnosis of RA or other RA-related diagnoses), specialist outpatient services, instrumental diagnostics and pharmaceutical consumption were assessed. RESULTS: The drug utilization analysis took into account only biologics with at least 90 patients on treatment at baseline (adalimumab n=144, etanercept n=236 and infliximab n=94). In each year, etanercept showed better persistence with initial treatment than adalimumab or infliximab. Etanercept was characterized by the lowest number of patients increasing the initial drug consumption (2.6%) and by the highest number of patients reducing the initial drug consumption (10.5%). The mean cost of treatment for a patient persisting with the initial treatment was 12,388 (14,182 for adalimumab, 12,103 for etanercept and 11,002 for infliximab). The treatment costs for patients switching from initial treatment during the first year of follow-up were higher than for patients who did not switch (12,710 vs. 11,332). CONCLUSION: Persistence, switch rate and drug consumption seem to directly influence treatment costs. In subjects not persisting with initial treatment, other health care costs were approximately three times higher than for persistent patients. This difference could suggest a positive effect on the quality of life for persistent patients. Etanercept showed the highest persistence with treatment.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficiency of resources allocation and sustainability of the use of netupitant+palonosetron (NEPA) for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) prophylaxis assuming the Italian National Health Service (NHS) perspective. A published Markov model was adapted to assess the incremental cost-utility ratio of NEPA compared with aprepitant (APR) + palonosetron (PALO), fosaprepitant (fAPR) + PALO, APR + ondansetron (ONDA), fAPR + ONDA in patients receiving a highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) and with APR + PALO and fAPR + PALO in patients receiving a moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC). SETTING: Oncology hospital department in Italy. METHODS: A Markov model was used to determine the impact of NEPA on the budget of the Italian NHS on a 5-day time horizon, corresponding to the acute and delayed CINV prophylaxis phases. Direct medical costs considered were related to antiemetic drugs, adverse events management, CINV episodes management. Clinical and quality of life data referred to previously published works. The budget impact analysis considered the aforementioned therapies plus PALO alone (for HEC and MEC) on a 5-year time horizon, comparing two scenarios: one considering the use of NEPA and one not considering its use. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Incremental cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) and differential economic impact for the Italian NHS between the two scenarios considered. RESULTS: NEPA is more effective and less expensive (dominant) compared with APR + PALO (for HEC and MEC), fAPR + PALO (for HEC and MEC), APR + ONDA (for HEC), fAPR + ONDA (for HEC). The use of NEPA would lead to a 5-year cost decrease of 63.7 million (42.7 million for HEC and 20.9 million for MEC). CONCLUSIONS: NEPA allows an efficient allocation of resources for the Italian NHS and it is sustainable, leading to a cost decrease compared with a scenario which does not consider its use.
Asunto(s)
Antieméticos , Antineoplásicos/efectos adversos , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Isoquinolinas , Náusea/prevención & control , Piridinas , Quinuclidinas , Vómitos/prevención & control , Antieméticos/economía , Antieméticos/uso terapéutico , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Presupuestos , Recursos en Salud , Humanos , Isoquinolinas/economía , Isoquinolinas/uso terapéutico , Italia , Programas Nacionales de Salud , Palonosetrón , Piridinas/economía , Piridinas/uso terapéutico , Calidad de Vida , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Quinuclidinas/economía , Quinuclidinas/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
Defining innovation in pharmacotherapy is complex because general definitions cannot be easily adapted to the specificity of different therapeutic areas. The Italian Society of Hospital Pharmacists has developed a position paper in which three criteria are used to recognise innovation to a new intervention: (1) clinical relevance of the trial's primary end-point; (2) evidence of superiority; (3) use of an adequate comparator in the controlled trial. Clinically relevant end-points should appear in predetermined lists by therapeutic area managed by our society; likewise, the third criterion must be documented by an authoritative therapeutic guideline recognised to be still valid. A preliminary attempt is presented to retrospectively apply these criteria, particularly the first one, to a series of 21 clinical trials; this initial experience has generated a first list of clinically relevant end-points. This approach of innovation assessment is proposed for application also in the field of medical devices.
Asunto(s)
Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto/métodos , Drogas en Investigación/clasificación , Drogas en Investigación/uso terapéutico , Proyectos de Investigación , Terminología como Asunto , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto/normas , Difusión de Innovaciones , Drogas en Investigación/normas , Determinación de Punto Final , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia , Humanos , Italia , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Proyectos de Investigación/normas , Sociedades Farmacéuticas/normas , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Albuminuria is a powerful predictor of renal and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes and a good indicator of the evolution of renal disease. Our aim was to obtain information concerning the identification of albuminuria as well as the utilization of antihypertensive, lipid-lowering and antiplatelet drugs in patients with diabetes. METHODS: Subjects were enrolled from individuals registered with 3 Italian local health units by querying the drugs reimbursable, hospital laboratory investigation and hospital discharge databases. The determination of albumin to creatinine ratio (ACR) throughout 2007 and 2008 was defined as the index date. Patients who received at least 2 prescriptions of hypoglycemic drugs in the 12 months before the index date were classified as diabetics. We looked also for prescriptions of antihypertensive, lipid-lowering and antiplatelet drugs. RESULTS: Among a population of 701,133 subjects, we identified 29,350 patients with diabetes (4.2% of the cohort). ACR had been determined in 5,644 diabetic subjects (19.2% of that cohort). The prevalence of determination of ACR in nontreated subjects was 16.0%, while in treated subjects, it ranged from 13.6% to 34.9% according to different schedules of treatment. Drugs acting on the renin-angiotensin system were prescribed in more then 80% of diabetics. The ratio of angiotensin receptor blockers to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors regimen was 0.64 in subjects without determination of ACR, 0.88 in subjects with normal albuminuria, 1.02 in subjects with microalbuminuria and 1.43 in subjects with macroalbuminuria. CONCLUSIONS: Our methodology can easily be applied to obtain an epidemiological view of albuminuria and pharmacological treatments of diabetics in a general population.