Healthcare resource use and reimbursement amount by site of care in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma receiving chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy - a retrospective cohort study using CMS 100% Medicare claims database.

Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) infusion settings may impact healthcare resource use (HRU) and reimbursement amounts. Adults with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma receiving CAR-T therapy were identified from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) 100% fee-for-service Medicare database and stratified into inpatient (IP; n = 380) and outpatient (OP; n = 50) cohorts based on CAR-T infusion setting. During the first month post-infusion, OP cohort had significantly fewer IP visits, IP days, intensive care unit (ICU) stays, ICU days, and significantly more OP, emergency room (ER) visits, than IP cohort. In subsequent months, HRU became comparable between cohorts. Medicare reimbursement amounts during the first month post-infusion were nominally higher in the OP vs. IP cohort and comparable in subsequent months. The reimbursement amounts did not reflect the reduced HRU with OP infusions, potentially due to differences in Medicare payment policies for OP vs. IP services.

Quantification of Economic Impact of Drug Wastage in Oral Oncology Medications: Comparison of 3 Methods Using Palbociclib and Ribociclib in Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Discarding unused drugs after dose changes or discontinuation can significantly affect pharmacy budgets. This is especially concerning for expensive oncology agents. However, few economic studies account for drug wastage, providing an inaccurate estimate of a drug's actual economic cost, cost-effectiveness, and value. OBJECTIVES: To (a) compare the economic impact of drug wastage between ribociclib and palbociclib-clinically similar oral medications for metastatic breast cancer-using 3 approaches (Markov model, pharmacy acquisition cost model, and a retrospective claims analysis) and (b) compare the modeling results with a published estimate of drug wastage for palbociclib from a claims analysis. METHODS: A Markov model and a pharmacy acquisitions cost model were developed to evaluate the economic impact of dose reductions for ribociclib and palbociclib over a 1-year time period. Data inputs were pharmacy costs (RED BOOK wholesale acquisition cost) and proportion of patients experiencing dose reductions from either ribociclib randomized clinical trials (MONALEESA-2, -3, or -7) or real-world observational data (Symphony Health retrospective claims analysis). The latter constituted the third approach for quantifying drug wastage. The economic impact of dose reductions for ribociclib and palbociclib in postmenopausal women with previously untreated HR-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer was assessed. Drug wastage was defined as drug doses that could not be used by a patient following a dose reduction. The cost of drug wastage was defined as the cost associated with an unused drug resulting from a dose reduction. The predicted results from the 2 models were compared with a previously published claims analysis that estimated the effect of treatment costs and drug wastage for palbociclib based on the observed dosing patterns from the Symphony Health Solutions database. RESULTS: In the Markov model, relative to ribociclib, palbociclib users experienced drug wastage of $112,382 total, or $1,124 per treated patient, per year due to dose changes. In the pharmacy acquisition cost model, relative to ribociclib, palbociclib usage was associated with an increased cost of $7,196 per patient per year (based on a mid-cycle dose reduction) comprising dosing-based cost differences and drug wastage cost for palbociclib of $3,727. The previously published claims analysis found that palbociclib users experiencing a dose reduction had drug wastage costs of $5,471 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: In both models, dose reductions for ribociclib patients resulted in no wastage, since unused tablets could be administered in subsequent cycles, while dose reductions for palbociclib resulted in drug wastage and increased costs. The results from both models were consistent with previously published results from the claims analysis, demonstrating drug wastage costs for palbociclib. DISCLOSURES: This study received financial support from Novartis Pharmaceuticals, which has products approved for treatment of breast cancer. Tang was employed by Novartis during this study; Zacker and Dalal are employed by Novartis and own company stock. Biskupiak, Brixner, and Oderda received payment from Novartis for this study. Brixner serves as a consultant for Millcreek Outcomes Group and also declares consulting fees from Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Abbott, Becton Dickinson, and Xcenda, unrelated to this study.

COPD affects worker productivity and health care costs.

Purpose: This study aimed to measure the true burden of COPD by calculating incremental direct and indirect costs. Direct medical resource use, productivity metrics, and COPD-specific resource use and costs were also evaluated. Patients and methods: This was a retrospective, observational, matched cohort study using administrative claims data from the Truven Health MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters and the Health and Productivity Management databases (2007-2010). Working-age (18-65 years) patients with COPD were identified as having at least one hospitalization or one emergency department visit or two outpatient visits. Patients in the non-COPD cohort did not have a diagnosis of COPD during the study period. Outcomes were evaluated in the first full calendar year after the year of identification (index). Results: Of the 5,701 patients with COPD identified, 3.6% patients were frequent exacerbators (≥2), 10.4% patients were infrequent exacerbators (1), and 86% patients were non-exacerbators (0). When compared with the 17,103 patients without COPD, the incremental direct cost of COPD was estimated at $6,246/patient/year (95% confidence interval: $4,620, $8,623; P<0.001). Loss in productivity was significantly greater in patients with COPD, with an average of 5 more days/year of absence from work and incremental indirect costs from short-term disability of $641 (P<0.001). Direct costs for frequent exacerbators ($17,651/year) and infrequent exacerbators ($14,501/year) were significantly higher than those for non-exacerbators ($11,395, P<0.001). Conclusion: Working-age patients with COPD incur statistically significantly higher direct and indirect costs and use more resources compared with those who do not have COPD.

Treatment and Monitoring Patterns Among Premenopausal Women with HR+/HER2- Advanced Breast Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Premenopausal women with hormone receptor positive (HR+) and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (aBC) often present with aggressive tumor types that lead to poor prognosis, high rates of recurrence, and mortality. Although clinical guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for optimal treatment and monitoring, there is a dearth of information regarding treatment and monitoring patterns in clinical practice. In this study, we describe treatment and monitoring patterns among premenopausal women with HR+/HER2- aBC in real-world practice. METHODS: A large US claims database was used to describe treatment patterns for patients in first, second, and third lines of therapy. Treatment monitoring included complete blood count (CBC), liver function test (LFT), and electrocardiogram (EKG) monitoring, described for the first three lines of therapy, and separately for patients receiving endocrine monotherapy (ET) and chemotherapy. RESULTS: Among 3203 patients, chemotherapy was the most common treatment used in first-line (63.6%) and second-line therapy (66.9%). ET was used in 34.4, 30.1, and 73.6% of patients in first, second, and third lines of therapy, respectively. The two most common treatment sequences were a single line of ET (27.3%), and two consecutive lines of chemotherapy followed by a line of ET (19.3%). Patients receiving chemotherapy were monitored with CBC on average more than two times per month, and for LFT one to two times per month. Patients receiving ET were monitored with CBC and LFT on average once every 2-3 months. Overall, approximately 20% of patients were monitored with an EKG at some point during each line of therapy. CONCLUSION: A considerable proportion of premenopausal women with aBC received first- and second-line chemotherapy, which appears inconsistent with current clinical guidelines. The observed treatment heterogeneity points to a lack real-world consensus on the management of premenopausal women with HR+/HER2- aBC. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.

Budget impact of including ribociclib in combination with letrozole on US payer formulary: first-line treatment of post-menopausal women with HR+/HER2- advanced or metastatic breast cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The combination of a cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK 4/6) inhibitor with the aromatase inhibitor letrozole is a safe and effective alternative to letrozole monotherapy for first-line hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) breast cancer. This study evaluates the budget impact of using the CDK 4/6 inhibitor ribociclib plus letrozole as a first-line treatment option for postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer, from a United States (US) payer perspective. METHODS: A cohort-based budget impact model was used to calculate the incremental cost of introducing ribociclib plus letrozole over three years for the target population. The analysis compared two scenarios: treatment options excluding or including ribociclib plus letrozole. Market shares were derived from market research and the assumption was the introduction of ribociclib plus letrozole would only displace existing CDK-based therapies. Treatment duration was based on the median time to treatment discontinuation or median progression-free survival for first-line treatment, and on clinical trial data for second- and third-line treatment. Acquisition costs were based on wholesale acquisition costs and considered co-payment. Costs for drug administration and monitoring, subsequent therapy, and relevant adverse events were included. RESULTS: Of 1 million insured members, 263 were eligible for CDK 4/6 inhibitor treatment. Cumulative total savings with ribociclib plus letrozole were $3.01M over three years, corresponding to a cumulative incremental cost saving of $318.11 per member treated per month. CONCLUSIONS: In the US, ribociclib plus letrozole represents a cost-saving first-line treatment option for postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer.

Dosing Patterns and Economic Burden of Palbociclib Drug Wastage in HR+/HER2- Metastatic Breast Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Targeted therapies have revolutionized the treatment of hormone receptor positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC). However, as for many oncology drugs, the dose of targeted therapies may need to be adjusted over time, leading to drug wastage when a dose modification is needed but the dose cannot be split or saved. This has been shown to be the case for palbociclib and has led to concerns among payers. This study described palbociclib dosing patterns and estimated the economic burden of the drug wastage associated with palbociclib dose modifications in postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- mBC. METHODS: A large US claims database was used to identify postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- mBC who received a palbociclib-based therapy during one of their first three lines of therapy for mBC between February 2015 (palbociclib approval) and December 2015. Dosing patterns (dosing modifications and sequences) were reported; a dose modification was defined as an increase/decrease of at least 25 mg daily compared to the preceding dose. Estimates of drug wastage costs were based on days with overlap in prescription fills for different palbociclib doses. RESULTS: A total of 473 postmenopausal palbociclib-treated women with HR+/HER2- mBC were included (first line 214; second line 157; third line 120). Over an average duration of line of therapy of approximately 4 months, dose modification was observed in 17.8%, 31.2%, and 35.0% of patients in first, second, and third line. Average overlap in prescription fills was 9.2, 9.9, and 5.4 days in first, second, and third line. This potential drug wastage resulted in an average cost of $4376, $4740, and $2592 per patient in first, second, and third line. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that drug wastage due to palbociclib dose modification results in substantial costs. Treatment options with more flexible dosing may help reduce the costs of drug wastage. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.

Cost-Effectiveness of Ribociclib plus Letrozole Versus Palbociclib plus Letrozole and Letrozole Monotherapy in the First-Line Treatment of Postmenopausal Women with HR+/HER2- Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer: A U.S. Payer Perspective.

BACKGROUND: U.S. regulatory approvals of the cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK 4/6) inhibitors ribociclib and palbociclib as add-ons to letrozole greatly enhance the prospects for treating postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced or metastatic breast cancer. Clinical trials have established that the combination of a CDK 4/6 inhibitor with letrozole can significantly improve progression-free survival (PFS) versus letrozole monotherapy and is safe and well tolerated. Cost-effectiveness studies are required to inform payers and clinical decision makers on the money value of combination treatment in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ribociclib plus letrozole versus palbociclib plus letrozole and versus letrozole monotherapy in the first-line treatment of postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- advanced or metastatic breast cancer from a U.S. private third-party payer perspective. METHODS: A partitioned survival model including 3 health states (progression free, with either overall response or stable disease; progressed disease; and death) simulated lifetime costs and outcomes over a 40-year lifetime horizon with a 1-month cycle length. Clinical efficacy data (PFS and overall survival [OS]) were derived from a phase III trial of ribociclib plus letrozole (MONALEESA-2; NCT01958021), a phase II trial of palbociclib plus letrozole (PALOMA-1; NCT00721409), and a Bayesian network meta-analysis. Health care costs included drug acquisition and monitoring, disease management, subsequent therapies, and serious drug-related adverse events. Effectiveness was measured in life-years, derived from survival projections, and in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), calculated from time spent in each state combined with health-state utility values. A one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis explored the impact of uncertainty in key model parameters on results, and probabilistic uncertainty was assessed through a Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Ribociclib plus letrozole was dominant versus palbociclib plus letrozole, with a cost saving of $43,037 and a gain of 0.086 QALYs. Compared with letrozole monotherapy, ribociclib plus letrozole was associated with an incremental cost of $144,915 and an incremental QALY of 0.689, equating to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $210,369 per QALY. Key model drivers included OS HRs for palbociclib plus letrozole versus letrozole and for ribociclib plus letrozole versus letrozole, the PFS HR for palbociclib plus letrozole versus letrozole, PD health-state costs, utility of response, and cost discount rate. The probabilities that ribociclib plus letrozole was cost-effective versus letrozole at thresholds of $50,000, $100,000 and $200,000 per QALY gained were 1.6%, 6.3%, and 50.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In the United States, ribociclib plus letrozole is a cost-effective alternative to palbociclib plus letrozole for the first-line treatment of postmenopausal women with HR+/HER2- advanced or metastatic breast cancer. Ribociclib plus letrozole is also cost-effective versus letrozole monotherapy at willingness-to-pay thresholds greater than $198,000 per QALY (for probabilistic analysis). DISCLOSURES: Funding for this study was provided by Novartis, which manufactures ribociclib and provided input on the study design and data collection, analysis, and interpretation. Mistry, May, Suri, and Young are employees of PAREXEL. Tang, Mishra, D. Bhattacharyya, and Dalal are employees of Novartis. S. Bhattacharyya was an employee of Novartis during the study period. Tang and Dalal hold stock in Novartis. Brixner, Oderda, and Biskupiak were paid by Millcreek Outcomes Group as consultants for work on this project. Brixner has also consulted for AstraZeneca, UCB, Regeneron, and Abbott.

Treatment patterns, clinical and economic outcomes of patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive non-small cell lung cancer receiving ceritinib: a retrospective observational claims analysis.

Objective: To describe patient characteristics, treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization (HRU), and costs among patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) receiving ceritinib in second or later line of therapy. Methods: Adult patients with NSCLC receiving ceritinib were identified from two large US claims databases (2006-2015). Patient characteristics, comorbidity profile, treatment patterns prior to ceritinib, and ceritinib dosing patterns were described. All-cause, HRU, and costs incurred during the observation period after ceritinib initiation were reported per patient per six months. Results: One hundred sixty-four patients were included (mean age 54.2 years, 57.3% female); the majority had metastatic disease (94.5%) and the average Charlson Comorbidity Index was 7.6. 150 (91.5%) patients received crizotinib prior to ceritinib - average crizotinib duration was 10.2 months and time between crizotinib discontinuation and ceritinib initiation was 2.1 months (median= 0; 25th-75th percentile= 0-0.8). Most patients (73.8%) initiated ceritinib on the recommended dose (750 mg) and maintained the dose until the end of the observation period (mean of 7.4 months) or ceritinib discontinuation; 61 (37.2%) patients discontinued ceritinib during the observation period. A total of 76 (46.3%) patients had at least one inpatient admission during the observation period after ceritinib initiation. Mean total healthcare cost per patient per six months was $111,468. Conclusions: Patients with ALK-positive NSCLC receiving ceritinib had a high comorbidity burden and generally started ceritinib on the recommended dose quickly after crizotinib discontinuation. Medical costs accounted for nearly a half of the total healthcare costs.

Economic Burden of HR+/HER2- Metastatic Breast Cancer Among Adult Premenopausal Women.

INTRODUCTION: Premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer (mBC) have complex treatment needs and may receive sequential combinations of endocrine therapy (ET) or chemotherapy. This study describes healthcare utilization (HRU) and costs among premenopausal women with HR+/HER2- mBC in real-world settings from a payer's perspective. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, premenopausal women with HR+/HER2- mBC who received ET or chemotherapy were identified from the Truven Health Analytics MarketScan database (1 January 2006-31 December 2015). The main HRU outcomes per patient per 6 months (PPP6 M) were measured during each line of therapy and included number of days in inpatient (IP) and outpatient (OP) services. Healthcare costs per patient per month (PPPM) included medical and pharmacy costs. RESULTS: A total of 3203 patients received first-line, 2194 received second-line, and 1242 received third-line therapy for mBC. Mean number of IP days PPP6 M were 1.6, 1.3, and 1.5 days in the first, second, and third lines, respectively. Mean number of days with OP services PPP6 M was 31.4, 30.9, and 23.3 in the first, second, and third lines, respectively. Among patients receiving ET, mean total healthcare costs were $6521, $4440, and $4555 PPPM in the first, second, and third line, respectively. Among patients receiving chemotherapy, mean total healthcare costs were $16,842, $12,868, and $16,129 PPPM in the first, second, and third line, respectively. These costs were mainly driven by treatment and OP costs. CONCLUSION: Real-world HRU and costs among premenopausal women with HR+/HER2- mBC are extensive. Patients who received chemotherapy incurred approximately twice the costs of patients treated with ET. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceutical Corp.

Economic analysis of BRAF gene mutation testing in real world practice using claims data: costs of single gene versus panel tests in patients with lung cancer.

AIMS: To assess the time to BRAF testing, compare the characteristics of tested vs not-tested patients, and describe the costs for sequential vs next-generation sequencing (NGS) BRAF testing. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with lung cancer after December 1, 2013 were identified from two US claims databases; their characteristics were assessed during the 12 months before diagnosis (index date). Testing modalities were analyzed from the index date to end of continuous health plan enrollment or data availability (December 2015), based on combinations of Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) procedure codes. Time to BRAF testing was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Costs were analyzed from a payer's perspective. RESULTS: A total of 28,011 patients newly-diagnosed with lung cancer were identified. Of them, 1,260 (4.5%) were tested for BRAF: 3.2% and 4.2% were tested at 6 and 12 months, respectively, after the index date. Compared to non-tested patients, tested patients were younger (58.3 vs 65.3 years; p < .001), had a lower Charlson Comorbidity Index (2.8 vs 2.9; p = .005), and a higher proportion had metastases (70.9% vs 43.4%; p < .001). In 76.0% of cases, BRAF was tested along with KRAS. BRAF was tested using NGS in 6.6% of cases. The average reimbursed amounts for the 10 most common CPT code combinations were $207-$2,074. Using the average costs of individual mutation tests, the total cost of sequential testing comprising KRAS, EGFR, ALK, ROS1, and BRAF tests was $3,763 ($464, $696, $1,070, $1,127, and $406, respectively), that of NGS was $2,860. LIMITATIONS: Claims data did not include BRAF test results. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients newly-diagnosed with lung cancer, 4.5% were tested for BRAF. Tested patients were younger and had a lower comorbidity burden, but more advanced disease. While reimbursed amounts varied greatly based on combinations of testing procedures, NGS testing was associated with cost savings compared to sequential testing of individual mutations.

Clinical and economic burden of dyspnea and other COPD symptoms in a managed care setting.

PURPOSE: The degree to which symptoms such as dyspnea affect patients with COPD is individualized. To address the gap between clinical symptom measures and self-perceived disease burden, we investigated the symptom status of adult patients with COPD and followed with an administrative claims analysis of health care resource utilization and costs. METHODS: This was a hybrid US observational study consisting of a cross-sectional patient survey followed by a retrospective analysis of administrative claims data. The primary COPD symptom measures were the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) Dyspnea scale and the COPD Assessment Test (CAT). RESULTS: A total of 673 patients completed the survey. Of these, 65% reported mMRC grades 0-1 (low symptomatology) and 35% reported mMRC grades 2-4 (high symptomatology); 25% reported CAT score <10 (low symptomatology) and 75% reported CAT score ≥10 (high symptomatology). More patients with high symptomatology (by either measure) had at least one COPD-related inpatient hospitalization, emergency room visit, physician office visit, or other outpatient services, and filled at least one COPD-related prescription medication vs patients with low symptomatology. COPD-related costs were higher for patients with high symptomatology than patients with low symptomatology. In a multivariate analysis, COPD-related costs were also higher in patients reporting severe symptoms. CONCLUSION: Patients with high COPD symptomatology utilized more health care resources and had higher COPD-related health care costs during the 6-month post-survey period than patients with low symptomatology.

Burden of systemic glucocorticoid-related complications in severe asthma.

OBJECTIVES: Although systemic glucocorticoids (SGCs) are efficacious, their chronic use is associated with a range of complications. Yet limited data are available about the risks following chronic use in patients with severe asthma, who are at risk of long-term SGC-related complications. This study was carried out to investigate the risks of developing SGC-related complications, and to quantify the associated healthcare resource utilization and costs for patients with severe asthma in the United States. METHODS: This was a longitudinal, open-cohort, observational study. Medicaid claims data (1997-2013) for patients ≥12 years old with ≥2 asthma diagnoses were used. A total of 26,987 SGC non-users were identified for inclusion in the study, alongside 3628 SGC users with ≥6 months' continuous SGC use. RESULTS: Multivariate generalized estimating equation models were used to estimate the adjusted risk of developing SGC-related complications, and to quantify the associated healthcare resource utilization and costs. This analysis compared SGC users with SGC non-users, and found that SGC users had an increased likelihood of developing complications. A significant dose-response relationship was demonstrated between chronic SGC use and risk of developing any complications (odds ratios for low, medium, and high SGC exposure were 2.03 [p = .0511], 2.85 [p < .0001], and 3.64 [p < .0001], respectively, vs. SGC non-users). The increased likelihood of SGC-related complications translated into estimated annual healthcare costs for SGC users of $2712 to $8560 above those of SGC non-users. A key limitation of this study is the disparity in age between the SGC users and the SGC non-users; however, age was included as a confounding factor in the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: These findings confirm the risk associated with chronic use of SGCs, irrespective of dose level, and highlight the need for new SGC-sparing treatment strategies for patients with severe asthma.

Prompt initiation of maintenance treatment following a COPD exacerbation: outcomes in a large insured population.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to extend previous findings and determine the value of prompt initiation of maintenance treatment (MT) following COPD exacerbations requiring hospitalization or an emergency department (ED) visit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Administrative claims data (collected between January 1, 2009 and June 30, 2012) from an employer-sponsored commercially insured population were retrospectively used to identify patients with a COPD exacerbation resulting in hospitalization or an ED visit. Patients initiating approved MT for COPD within 30 days of discharge/diagnosis (prompt) were compared with those initiating MT within 31-180 days (delayed). COPD-related total, medical, and prescription drug costs during a 1-year follow-up period were evaluated using semilog ordinary least square regressions, controlling for baseline characteristics plus COPD-related costs from the previous year. The odds and number of subsequent COPD-related exacerbations during the follow-up were compared between the prompt and delayed cohorts using logistic regression and zero-inflated negative binomial models, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 6,521 patients with a COPD-related hospitalization or an ED visit were included, of whom 4,555 received prompt MT and 1,966 received delayed MT. Adjusted COPD-related total and medical costs were significantly lower for the prompt MT than the delayed MT cohorts (US$3,931 vs US$4,857 and US$2,327 vs US$3,087, respectively; both P<0.010), as were COPD-related prescription costs (US$1,526 vs US$1,683, P<0.010) during the 1-year follow-up period. Patients receiving delayed MT were 68% more likely to have a subsequent exacerbation requiring hospitalization and 80% more likely to have an exacerbation requiring an ED visit. CONCLUSION: Prompt initiation of MT following a COPD-related hospitalization or an ED visit was associated with a significant reduction in COPD-related costs and odds of exacerbation in the following year compared with delayed initiation.

Economic Burden of Illness Among Patients with Severe Asthma in a Managed Care Setting.

BACKGROUND: Despite intensive pharmacotherapy, a considerable number of patients with severe asthma have inadequate disease control. Patients with severe asthma who experience exacerbations consume significant health care resources. OBJECTIVE: To assess health care resource utilization and associated costs among patients with persistent severe asthma who experienced exacerbations compared with patients with persistent but nonsevere asthma. METHODS: This retrospective analysis of a national administrative claims database identified patients aged ≥ 12 years who had at least 1 medical claim with an asthma diagnosis in 2012 and had continuous medical and pharmacy coverage under a commercial or Medicare Advantage plan from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2013. Patients were assigned to 1 of 2 mutually exclusive cohorts-persistent asthma (PA) or severe asthma (SA)-according to an established algorithm based on asthma-related health care resource use and pharmacy claims for controller medication. SA patients were required to meet PA criteria and also have evidence of ≥2 asthma exacerbations in 2012. Asthma-related health care resource utilization and costs were computed from asthma medication use (rescue and controller therapy) and medical claims with an asthma diagnosis in the primary position in 2012 and 2013. Adherence to controller therapy was assessed over 365 days by using the proportion of days covered (PDC), starting with the first claim for controller therapy in 2012. Differences between the PA and SA cohorts were analyzed by t-test for continuous variables and chi-square test for categorical variables. Asthma-related costs in 2013 were also analyzed using a generalized linear model with a gamma distribution and log link, adjusted for patient demographics (age, gender, region, and insurance type) and Quan-Charlson comorbidity score. RESULTS: A total of 65,359 patients were included: 63,597 (97.3%) PA patients and 1,762 SA patients (2.7%). Compared with the PA cohort, the SA cohort was older (mean age = 50.8 years vs. 46.5 years, P < 0.001) and had higher mean comorbidity score (1.47 vs. 1.31, P< 0.001). The mean count of all asthma medications fills was 2.2-fold (2012) and 2.1-fold (2013) higher in the SA cohort, compared with the PA cohort (P< 0.001). Mean PDC for all oral and inhaled controller therapy was also higher in the SA cohort compared with the PA cohort (0.80 vs. 0.65, P< 0.001). SA patients had a significantly greater mean count of asthma-related hospitalizations, emergency room visits, and ambulatory visits in 2012 and 2013 (P< 0.001). Unadjusted mean annual asthma-related costs in the SA versus PA cohorts were $6,496 versus $2,739 (P < 0.001) in 2012 and $5,174 versus $1,775 (P< 0.001) in 2013. Higher asthma-related costs were driven by greater mean annual asthma medication costs in 2012 ($4,545 vs. $1,738, P< 0.001) and 2013 ($4,068 vs. $1,348, P< 0.001). Adjusted mean annual asthma-related costs in 2013 were $3,336 greater (cost ratio=2.878, P< 0.001) in the SA cohort, and adjusted mean annual asthma medication costs were $2,672 higher (cost ratio=2.982, P< 0.001) in the SA cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with SA who experienced 2 or more exacerbations had 2.1-fold greater use of controller medications across both study years and were more adherent to controller therapy than patients with PA. Despite more intensive pharmacotherapy, SA patients incurred 2.9-fold higher adjusted asthma-related costs and 3-fold higher adjusted asthma medication costs than PA patients. Patients with SA consistently demonstrated a higher rate of health care utilization. DISCLOSURES: Funding for this study (HO-14-14443) was provided by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). All listed authors meet the criteria for authorship set forth by the International Committee for Medical Journal Editors. Albers, Forshag, and Yancey are employees of GSK and hold stock in GSK. Dalal, Nagar, and Ortega were employees of GSK at the time this research was conducted. Chastek and Korrer are employees of Optum, which received consulting fees from GSK for research related to this study. Study concept and design were contributed by Chastek, Nagar, and Dalal. Korrer took the lead in data collection, along with Chastek, and data interpretation was performed by Chastek, Ortega, Forshag, and Dalal. The manuscript was written by Chastek and Dalal and revised by Albers and Yancy, assisted by the other authors.

Utilization and Costs of Severe Uncontrolled Asthma in a Managed-Care Setting.

BACKGROUND: Clinical and economic burden of patients with severe uncontrolled asthma (SUA) in a real-world managed-care setting required further documentation. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the characteristics, clinical, and economic burden of SUA in a managed-care setting. METHODS: This observational study identified patients with persistent asthma aged 12 years or more (N = 25,935) using the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision asthma codes and Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set administrative criteria. An SUA subgroup was identified when all of the following 3 criteria were met in 2012: (1) 2 or more asthma exacerbations; (2) 6 or more medium- or high-dose dispensed canisters of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) as monotherapy or with long-acting ß2-agonist; and (3) 3 or more dispensed non-ICS controllers. Health care utilization and direct costs (all-cause and asthma-related) in 2013 were compared between SUA and non-SUA subgroups using multivariable regression. RESULTS: Compared with the non-SUA subgroup (N = 25,350, 97.7%), the SUA subgroup (N = 585, 2.3%) at baseline was significantly older and had more comorbidities, asthma specialist care, controller medication dispensed, and asthma exacerbations. During follow-up, patients with SUA exhibited significantly more asthma exacerbations and short-acting ß2-agonist use, and higher all-cause and asthma-related costs than patients with non-SUA. The adjusted asthma-related average direct cost per patient at follow-up was significantly higher for SUA (mean ± SE) ($2325 ± $75) than non-SUA ($1261 ± $9) with an incremental cost of $1056 (95% CI, $907-$1205). Asthma drugs accounted for the major difference (incremental cost of $848/patient; 95% CI, $737-$959). CONCLUSION: Increases and disparities in health care utilization and direct cost by SUA status suggest that patients with SUA require more intensive therapy, greater attention to adherence and comorbidities, more specialist care, and, possibly, personalized treatment approaches including novel biologic treatments.

Acute and chronic systemic corticosteroid-related complications in patients with severe asthma.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with severe asthma require maintenance treatment with systemic corticosteroids (SCSs) to control daily symptoms and prevent serious acute exacerbations, but chronic SCS use is associated with complications. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the risk of SCS-related complications by SCS exposure and quantify the associated health care costs and resource use in patients with severe asthma. METHODS: We performed a longitudinal, open-cohort, observational study using health insurance claims data (1997-2013: Medicaid) from Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Mississippi, and New Jersey. Eligible patients were 12 years old or older with 2 or more asthma diagnoses and had more than 6 months of continuous SCS use. An open-cohort approach was used to classify patients' follow-up into low, medium, and high SCS exposure (≤ 6, >6-12, and >12 mg/d, respectively). Multivariate generalized estimating equation models were used to estimate the adjusted risk of SCS-related complications for patients with medium and high exposure compared with patients with low exposure and quantify the resulting health care resource use and costs. RESULTS: The study included 3628 patients (mean age, 57.6 years; 68% female). Patients with medium and high SCS exposure had significantly higher risks of SCS-related complications, including infections and cardiovascular, metabolic, psychiatric, ocular, gastrointestinal, and bone-related complications (odds ratio, 1.23-2.12 by complication; P < .05 for all but one) versus those with low (reference group) SCS exposure. Medium and high SCS exposure were also associated with significantly more emergency department visits (incidence rate ratios, 1.31 [P = .0004] and 1.78 [P < .0001]) and inpatient visits (incidence rate ratios, 1.25 [P < .0001] and 1.59 [P < .0001]) versus low SCS exposure. CONCLUSIONS: A significant dose-response relationship was demonstrated between chronic SCS use and risk of SCS-related complications in patients with severe asthma. Effective SCS-sparing strategies might reduce the burden associated with SCS-related complications in patients with severe asthma.

Impact of COPD Exacerbation Frequency on Costs for a Managed Care Population.

BACKGROUND: There is scarce information on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) outcomes and costs for patients with differing levels of COPD exacerbations. OBJECTIVE: To examine COPD-related and all-cause health care resource use and costs in subsequent years for frequently and infrequently exacerbating COPD patients. METHODS: Patients with a diagnosis of COPD (ICD-9-CM codes 491.xx, 492.xx, and 496.xx) were identified (1 hospitalization or 1 emergency department visit or at least 2 outpatient visits) using administrative claims data in 2007. Patients were classified in 2008 as frequent (at least 2 exacerbations/year), infrequent (1 exacerbation/year) and nonexacerbators. Outcomes were computed during a subsequent 2-year period (2009 and 2010). Average per person estimates and total sample-level estimates were calculated. A logistic regression model estimated the predictors of having 2 or more exacerbations per year during the follow-up period. RESULTS: 61,750 COPD patients met the study criteria (mean age 67 years). Of these, 6% (n = 3,852) were frequent exacerbators; 14% were infrequent exacerbators (n = 8,416); and 80% were nonexacerbators (n = 49,482). At baseline, average all-cause health care costs per patient for frequent exacerbators were highest followed by infrequent and nonexacerbators ($12,837, $10,480, and $7,756, respectively). On average, 60% of frequent and 40% of infrequent exacerbators had at least 1 exacerbation per year in follow-up. Average annual per patient COPD-related costs for frequent exacerbators ($3,565 in 2009 and $3,528 in 2010) were more than 3 times (P less than 0.05) and infrequent exacerbators ($2,264 in 2009 and $2,265 in 2010) were more than 2 times (P less than 0.05) higher compared with nonexacerbators ($1,007 in 2009 and $1,027 in 2010). On a total sample-level, infrequent exacerbators were similar if not more burdensome compared with frequent exacerbators in the proportion accounted by these cohorts for total COPD-related costs (23% vs. 18%, respectively) and total number of COPD exacerbations per year (26% vs. 26%). Compared with nonexacerbators, infrequent exacerbators were 3 times (OR = 2.8, P less than 0.001) significantly more likely to have 2 or more exacerbations per year in follow-up, and frequent exacerbators were 7 times (OR = 6.76, P less than 0.001) significantly more likely to have 2 or more exacerbations per year in follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Infrequent exacerbators have an increased risk for future exacerbations compared with nonexacerbators and, on a total sample-level, incur greater costs compared with frequent exacerbators, demonstrating a significant economic burden.

A clinical study of COPD severity assessment by primary care physicians and their patients compared with spirometry.

PURPOSE: Primary care physicians often do not use spirometry to confirm the diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. This project was designed to see how well physicians' impressions about their patients' chronic obstructive pulmonary disease severity correlate with the severity of airflow obstruction measured by spirometry and to assess whether spirometry results subsequently changed the physicians' opinions about chronic obstructive pulmonary disease severity and treatment. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, cross-sectional, observational study conducted in 83 primary care clinics from across the United States. A total of 899 patients with a clinical diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease completed a questionnaire and spirometry testing. Physicians completed a questionnaire and case report forms. Concordance among physician ratings, patient ratings, and spirometry results was evaluated. RESULTS: Physicians' chronic obstructive pulmonary disease severity ratings before spirometry were accurate for only 30% of patients with evaluable spirometry results, and disease severity in 41% of patients was underestimated. Physicians also underestimated severity compared with patients' self-assessment among 42% of those with evaluable results. After spirometry, physicians changed their opinions on the severity for 30% of patients and recommended treatment changes for 37%. Only 75% of patients performed at least 1 high-quality spirometry test; however, the physicians' opinions and treatment decisions were similar regardless of suboptimal test results. CONCLUSIONS: Without performing spirometry, physicians are likely to underestimate their patients' chronic obstructive pulmonary disease severity or inadequately characterize their patients' lung disease. Spirometry changed the physicians' clinical impressions and treatments for approximately one third of these patients; thus, spirometry is a valuable tool for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease management in primary care.

Indirect costs in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a review of the economic burden on employers and individuals in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To review and summarize existing literature on the indirect burden of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the US. METHODS: Medline, Scopus, and OvidSP databases were searched using defined search terms to identify relevant studies. Eligible studies were published in English between January 2000 and April 2012 and calculated the indirect burden of COPD in a US population in terms of prevalence, incidence or costs of productivity loss, disability, morbidity, or mortality. RESULTS: Of 53 studies identified, eleven met eligibility criteria, with data years spanning 1987-2009. Estimates of workforce participation range from 56% to 69% among individuals with COPD and from 65% to 77% among individuals without COPD. Approximately 13%-18% of those with COPD are limited in the amount or type of work they can do and one-third or more experience general activity limitation. Estimates of restricted activity days range from 27-63 days per year. Estimates of mean annual sick leave and/or disability days among employed individuals with COPD range from 1.3-19.4 days. Estimates of bed confinement range from 13-32 days per year. Estimated mean annual indirect costs were $893-$2,234/person (US dollars) with COPD ($1,521-$3,348 in 2010 [US dollars]) and varied with the population studied, specific cost outcomes, and economic inputs. In studies that assessed total (direct and indirect) costs, indirect costs accounted for 27%-61% of total costs, depending on the population studied. CONCLUSIONS: COPD is associated with substantial indirect costs. The disease places a burden on employers in terms of lost productivity and associated costs and on individuals in terms of lost income related to absenteeism, activity limitation, and disability. Consideration of indirect as well as direct costs is necessary to gain a more complete view of the societal burden of COPD.

Clinical and economic burden of COPD in a medicaid population.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical and economic burden of COPD patients to Medicaid. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective, observational matched cohort design. METHODS: We calculated the incremental costs incurred and medical resources used by COPD patients relative to those without COPD. Data were obtained from 8 Medicaid states during 2003-2007. COPD patients were defined as Medicaid beneficiaries ≥40 years with a COPD diagnosis (ICD-9 CM: 491.xx, 492.xx, 496.xx) and treated with maintenance drugs for COPD. Patients were matched (1:3) to Medicaid beneficiaries without a COPD diagnosis on age, gender, race, index year, Medicare/Medicaid dual eligibility, and use of long-term care. Results were stratified by Medicare/Medicaid dual eligibility status and race. RESULTS: A total of 10,221 COPD and 30,663 non-COPD patients were included. Cohorts were on average 65 years of age, 80% White, and 64.8% having Medicare/Medicaid dual eligibility. Inpatient hospitalizations and home healthcare visits/durable medical equipment were primary drivers of incremental medical costs. COPD patients were more than twice as likely to have a hospitalization (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] = 2.32 [2.19, 2.45]) or home healthcare visit/durable medical equipment (2.95 [2.82, 3.08]) compared to non-COPD patients. Medicaid incurred $2118/year in incremental costs due to COPD. On average, incremental costs were 7 times greater for non-dual-eligible patients ($4917) compared to dual-eligible patients ($667), and were more than double for Blacks compared to Whites ($4141 vs $1593). CONCLUSION: COPD imposes a substantial economic and clinical burden on the Medicaid program; this burden differs by dual eligibility status and race.