Estimating the economic burden of long-Covid: the additive cost of healthcare utilisation among COVID-19 recoverees in Israel.

INTRODUCTION: Postacute sequelae resulting from SARS-CoV-2 infections (LONG-COVID) have been reported. The resulting added economic burden from the perspective of healthcare organisations is not clear. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the additive healthcare costs among COVID-19 recoverees, in a large community-dwelling general population, as incurred by an insurer-provider organisation over time. METHODS: In this historical cohort study, cost data from Clalit Health Services (CHS) were analysed. The primary endpoint was the direct cost incurred by CHS per month per person. Costs were measured for COVID-19 recoverees and matched controls, from January 2019 to January 2022. Difference in differences (DiDs) were calculated as the difference in mean monthly costs in cases and controls in the post-COVID-19 individual period, deducing their cost difference in a prepandemic 12 months baseline period. RESULTS: Among N=642 868 community-dwelling COVID-19 recoverees, 268 948 (40.8%) were 0-19 years old and 63 051 (9.6%) were 60 years or older. A total of 16 017 (2.5%) of recoverees had been hospitalised during the acute phase of the COVID-19 disease. Costs in cases and controls converged after 16 months from recovery. The mean monthly cost incurred by CHS per COVID-19 recoverees over up to 15 months (mean: 8.25) of post-COVID-19 follow-up was higher by 8.2% (US$8.2) compared with matched controls. The excess cost attributable to post-COVID-19 effects (DID) was 7.6% of the cost in controls (US$7.7 per patient per month). Both net and relative DIDs were substantially higher in patients who required hospitalisation during the acute phase of COVID-19 and in older adults. Excess in hospitalisations, primary care physicians and medical specialists' visits-related costs were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term effects of SARS-CoV-2 infections translate into excess healthcare costs, months after recovery, hence requiring adjustments of funds allocation. These excess costs gradually diminish after recoveree, returning to baseline differences 16 months after recoveree.

Identification of drugs associated with reduced severity of COVID-19 - a case-control study in a large population.

Background: Until coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) drugs specifically developed to treat COVID-19 become more widely accessible, it is crucial to identify whether existing medications have a protective effect against severe disease. Toward this objective, we conducted a large population study in Clalit Health Services (CHS), the largest healthcare provider in Israel, insuring over 4.7 million members. Methods: Two case-control matched cohorts were assembled to assess which medications, acquired in the last month, decreased the risk of COVID-19 hospitalization. Case patients were adults aged 18 to 95 hospitalized for COVID-19. In the first cohort, five control patients, from the general population, were matched to each case (n=6202); in the second cohort, two non-hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 positive control patients were matched to each case (n=6919). The outcome measures for a medication were: odds ratio (OR) for hospitalization, 95% confidence interval (CI), and the p-value, using Fisher's exact test. False discovery rate was used to adjust for multiple testing. Results: Medications associated with most significantly reduced odds for COVID-19 hospitalization include: ubiquinone (OR=0.185, 95% CI [0.058 to 0.458], p<0.001), ezetimibe (OR=0.488, 95% CI [0.377 to 0.622], p<0.001), rosuvastatin (OR=0.673, 95% CI [0.596 to 0.758], p<0.001), flecainide (OR=0.301, 95% CI [0.118 to 0.641], p<0.001), and vitamin D (OR=0.869, 95% CI [0.792 to 0.954], p<0.003). Remarkably, acquisition of artificial tears, eye care wipes, and several ophthalmological products were also associated with decreased risk for hospitalization. Conclusions: Ubiquinone, ezetimibe, and rosuvastatin, all related to the cholesterol synthesis pathway were associated with reduced hospitalization risk. These findings point to a promising protective effect which should be further investigated in controlled, prospective studies. Funding: This research was supported in part by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health, NCI.

Thyroid function assessment before and after diagnosis of schizophrenia: A community-based study.

Alterations in thyroid hormone levels may affect brain and mental disorders. Conversely, schizophrenia and its antipsychotic treatments can affect thyroid hormone levels. However, data on thyroid hormone levels during the course of schizophrenia disorder are scant. The aim of the study was to assess the rate of thyroid hormone disorders in outpatients before and after diagnosis of schizophrenia. A retrospective matched-control design was used. The cohort included 1252 patients suffering from ICD-10 schizophrenia, and 3756 control subjects matched for gender, age, socioeconomic status, and origin. All were identified from the database of a large health management organization. The pertinent clinical data were collected from the electronic medical records. There was no significant between-group difference in the distribution of thyroid-stimulating hormone levels. Before diagnosis, both groups had a similar rate of hypothyroidism. After diagnosis of schizophrenia and initiation of antipsychotic treatment, the rate of hypothyroidism was significantly higher in the patient group. It remained significantly higher after exclusion of patients receiving lithium. The increased rate of hypothyroidism in patients with schizophrenia after, but not before, the diagnosis of schizophrenia suggests that antipsychotic medications may affect thyroid hormone levels. Screening for thyroid disorders is warranted in patients with schizophrenia under antipsychotic treatment.

The ESMO-Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale for novel oncology drugs: correspondence with three years of reimbursement decisions in Israel.

BACKGROUND: The European Society for Medical Oncology published in 2015 its Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) for cancer medicines. Our objective was to evaluate the association between Israel's national reimbursement decisions regarding novel cancer drugs, prior to the availability of ESMO-MCBS, and the later published ESMO-MCBS scores. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: ESMO-MCBS scores were obtained retrospectively for the cancer drugs that were candidates for reimbursement in Israel in 2013-2015 and were categorized to 'highest benefit' (ESMO-MCBS 4-5 or A) 'medium benefit' (3 or B) and 'lowest benefit' (0-2 or C). The reimbursement decisions were accessed and compared with the categorized ESMO scores. RESULTS: ESMO-MCBS score was available for 19/22 drugs approved for reimbursement and 15/16 non-approved drugs. 58% of the approved drugs gained a 'highest benefit' score and 37% were 'medium benefit'. 87% of the non-approved drugs had 'lowest benefit' scores. Median score for approved drugs was 4 vs. 1 for the non-approved (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The Israeli decisions regarding reimbursement of novel cancer drugs, demonstrated concordance with ESMO-MCBS scores. Incorporation of ESMO-MCBS data in reimbursement deliberations could assist in framing the appropriate use of the limited resources to deliver effective and affordable cancer care.