Hemophilia without prophylaxis: Assessment of joint range of motion and factor activity.

BACKGROUND: Recurrent joint bleeding in hemophilia results in arthropathy and functional impairment. The relationship of arthropathy development and factor activity (FA) has not been reported in patients with FA levels <15%-20%. METHODS: During the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Universal Data Collection, joint range-of-motion (ROM) measurements were taken at each comprehensive visit. Data were extracted from male patients with hemophilia (PWH) age ≥2 years with baseline factor activity levels ≤40%, excluding those prescribed prophylaxis, and used to calculate a proportion of normal ROM (PN-ROM) measure. Data were analyzed using regression models. RESULTS: There were 6703 eligible PWH with 30 102 visits. PN-ROM declined with increasing age, and was associated with hemophilia severity, race/ethnicity, obesity, and viral illnesses. PWH ≥30 years old with fFA ≤2% and those ≥50 years old with FA ≤5% had mean PN-ROM values >10% less than controls; those ≥40 years old with FA <1% had values >20% less than controls. In the multivariable analysis, subjects with <1% FA had a 0.43% greater decrease (-0.49 to -0.37, 95% confidence interval) in PN-ROM each year relative to those with 16%-40% factor activity. A less pronounced effect was seen with 1%-5% or 6%-9% FA. CONCLUSION: The effect of FA on ROM loss is far greater than that of any of the other characteristics, especially with FA <10%. This emphasizes the need to maintain a high index of suspicion for arthropathy in individuals with moderate and low-mild hemophilia.

Healthcare Costs of Diabetes and Microvascular and Macrovascular Disease in Individuals with Incident Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Ten-Year Longitudinal Study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to estimate the incremental long-term costs associated with T2DM attributable to vascular diseases. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study identified newly diagnosed (incident) T2DM patients in 2007 (baseline to 01/01/2006) using the HealthCore Integrated Research Database, a repository of nationally representative claims data. Incident T2DM patients were 1:1 exact matched on age, gender and other factors of interest to non-DM patients, and followed until the earlier of 8 follow-up years or death. Patients with documented vascular disease diagnosis were identified during the study period. All-cause and T2DM/vascular disease-related annual healthcare costs were examined for each follow-up year. RESULTS: The study included 13,883 individuals with T2DM and matched non-DM controls. Among individuals with T2DM, 11,792 (85%) had vascular disease versus 9251 (66.6%) non-T2DM between 01/01/2006 and 12/31/2015. Among T2DM patients, mean all-cause annual costs were greater than in non-T2DM patients ($13,806 vs $7,243, baseline, $21,745 vs $8,524, post-index year 1, $12,756-$14,793 vs $8,349-$9,940 years 2-8, p< 0.001), respectively. A similar trend was observed for T2DM/vascular disease-related costs (p< 0. 001). T2DM/vascular disease-related costs were largest during post-index year 1, accounting for the majority of all-cause cost difference between T2DM patients and matched non-DM controls. Incident T2DM individuals without vascular disease at any time had significantly lower costs compared to non-DM controls (p< 0. 001) between years 2-8 of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Vascular disease increased the cost burden for individuals with T2DM. The cost impact of diabetes and vascular disease was highest in the year after diagnosis, and persisted for at least seven additional years, while the cost of T2DM patients without vascular disease trended lower than for matched non-DM patients. These data highlight potential costs that could be offset by earlier and more effective detection and management of T2DM aimed at reducing vascular disease burden.

Correction to: A Relative Cost of Control Analysis of Once-Weekly Semaglutide Versus Exenatide Extended-Release and Dulaglutide for Bringing Patients to HbA1c and Weight Loss Treatment Targets in the USA.

The article "A Relative Cost of Control Analysis of Once-Weekly Semaglutide Versus Exenatide Extended-Release and Dulaglutide for Bringing Patients to HbA1c and Weight Loss Treatment Targets in the USA", written by Pierre Johansen, Barnaby Hunt, Neeraj N. Iyer, Tam Dang-Tan, Richard F. Pollock was originally published electronically on the publisher's internet portal (currently SpringerLink) on November 27, 2018 without Open Access.

A Relative Cost of Control Analysis of Once-Weekly Semaglutide Versus Exenatide Extended-Release and Dulaglutide for Bringing Patients to HbA1c and Weight Loss Treatment Targets in the USA.

INTRODUCTION: The SUSTAIN 3 and 7 clinical trials compared the efficacy and safety of once-weekly semaglutide relative to exenatide extended-release (ER) and dulaglutide, respectively, in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). The trials included a series of clinically relevant single and composite endpoints focused on improving glycemic control and reducing body weight, while avoiding hypoglycemia. The present study combined SUSTAIN 3 and 7 outcomes with short-term treatment costs to evaluate the relative cost of control of once-weekly semaglutide versus exenatide ER and dulaglutide. METHODS: Proportions of patients reaching three endpoints were taken from SUSTAIN 3 and 7 for comparisons with exenatide ER and dulaglutide, respectively. The endpoints investigated were HbA1c < 7.0%, HbA1c < 7.0% without hypoglycemia or weight gain, and a ≥ 1.0% HbA1c reduction with ≥ 5.0% weight loss. Annual per patient treatment costs were based on US wholesale acquisition costs from July 2018. Relative cost of control was calculated by plotting the ratio of the treatment costs and the ratio of the proportions of patients reaching each endpoint on the cost-efficacy plane. RESULTS: Once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg and 1.0 mg were most effective at bringing patients to each of the three endpoints across both SUSTAIN trials. The efficacy-to-cost ratios for once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg and 1.0 mg were also superior to all comparators when assessing both the single endpoint of HbA1c < 7.0% and the two composite endpoints including weight loss and hypoglycemia. CONCLUSIONS: The present study showed that once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg and 1.0 mg offer superior cost of control versus exenatide ER and dulaglutide in terms of achieving single and composite endpoints, based on an analysis of retrieved dropout data. Once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg and 1.0 mg would therefore represent good value for money in the USA, particularly in the attainment of multi-model T2D treatment goals. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk A/S.

Effect of Weight Change on Economic Outcomes Among Persons with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in the United States: Beyond Glycemic Control.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies report weight loss to be associated with significantly lower total health care costs among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The effect of weight change on health care costs, independent of glycemic control and after controlling for time-varying covariates among T2DM patients, remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of weight change, independent of glycemic control, on all-cause and T2DM-related health care resource utilization (HCRU) and costs among T2DM patients in the United States. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using a linked data extract composed of IQVIA's RWI Data Adjudicated Claims-US and Ambulatory Electronic Medical Record data. Adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with T2DM receiving ≥ 1 oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) medication, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA), and/or short- or long-acting insulin between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2014 were included (the date of the first observed medical claim with a diagnosis code or medication prescription claim was the index date). Baseline characteristics were evaluated in the 6-month pre-index period. Weight loss (3%, 5%, or 7% from baseline) was evaluated over two 6-month periods (months 1-6 and 7-12) following the index date. Covariates included time-varying weight, hemoglobin A1c (A1c), costs, and HCRU within each 6-month period. Outcomes of interest (all-cause and T2DM-related HCRU and costs) were evaluated in the 6-month (months 13-18) and 12-month (months 13-24) periods following the initial 1- to 6-month and 7- to 12-month post-index periods. Structural nested mean models were used to evaluate the effect of weight change on these outcomes, independent of glycemic control. RESULTS: 1,407 patients were included (mean age = 55 years; 55% male), with a mean baseline weight of 102.2 kg (median = 99.7 kg) and a mean baseline A1c of 7.4% (median = 6.9%). In adjusted analysis, weight loss was associated with significantly lower all-cause and T2DM-related annual total health care costs. Compared with those showing no weight change, a 3%, 5%, and 7% weight loss resulted in approximately $500, $800, and $1,100 in savings, respectively, in all-cause annual total health care costs per patient in the year following the weight loss. Similarly, compared with those with no weight change, a 3%, 5%, and 7% weight loss resulted in approximately $200, $300, and $400 in savings, respectively, in T2DM-related annual total health care costs per patient in the following year. Even greater savings (up to ~$2,000 and ~$800 in all-cause and T2DM-related annual costs per patient, respectively) were experienced by those who lost weight compared with those who gained weight. CONCLUSIONS: After accounting for glycemic control, this study found that weight loss was associated with additional significant reductions in all-cause and T2DM-related annual total health care costs. Understanding the role of weight loss in T2DM may provide useful evidence for decision makers as they evaluate therapy options for T2DM. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Novo Nordisk. Dang-Tan, Smolarz, and Iyer are employees of Novo Nordisk. Karkare and DeKoven (employees of IQVIA) and Fridman (employed by AMF Consulting) were contracted by Novo Nordisk to conduct this study. Fridman also reports personal fees from Shire, GSK, and CSL Behring, outside of the submitted work. Lu, an employee of IQVIA, accessed the database and conducted the statistical analysis for this study.

Cost-effectiveness and budget impact of liraglutide in type 2 diabetes patients with elevated cardiovascular risk: a US-managed care perspective.

BACKGROUND: The Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcomes Results (LEADER) clinical trial demonstrated that liraglutide added to standard-of-care (SoC) therapy for type 2 diabetes (T2D) with established cardiovascular disease (CVD) or elevated cardiovascular (CV) risk was associated with lower rates of death from CVD, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), or nonfatal stroke than SoC alone. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness (CE) and budget impact of liraglutide vs SoC in T2D patients with established CVD or elevated CV risk, over a lifetime horizon from a US managed care perspective. METHODS: A cohort state-transition model (costs and benefits discounted at 3% per year) was used to predict diabetes-related complications and death (CV and all-cause). Events, treatment effects, and discontinuation rates were from LEADER trial; utility and cost data (US$, 2017) were from literature. Sensitivity analysis explored the impact of uncertainty on results. Additionally, a budget impact analysis was conducted to evaluate the financial impact of liraglutide use in this population, with displacement from dulaglutide, assuming a health care plan with 1 million members. RESULTS: Liraglutide patients experienced 6.3% fewer events, had event-related cost-savings of $15,182, gained additional life-years of 0.67 and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of 0.57, and had additional total costs ($60,928) vs SoC. Liraglutide was cost-effective with an incremental CE ratio of $106,749/QALY which was below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000/QALY accepted by the Institute of Clinical and Economic Research. Liraglutide was cost-effective across all sensitivity analyses, except when the hazard ratio for all-cause mortality varied. The budget impact was neutral, with a per-plan-per-year and per-member-per-month cost-savings of $266,334 and $0.02, respectively. CONCLUSION: From a US-managed care perspective, for T2D patients with established CVD or elevated CV risk, liraglutide is a cost-effective and a budget neutral treatment option for health care plans.

Incremental health care resource utilization and expenditures associated with autosomal-dominant polycystic kidney disease.

PURPOSE: Incremental health care resource utilization and expenditures associated with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) were estimated. METHODS: Study data were from a large administrative claims database. Individuals aged 18 years or older enrolled in tracked health plans for 12 months from April 1, 2011 through March 31, 2012, and with an International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis code for "polycystic kidney, autosomal dominant" (753.13) or for "polycystic kidney, unspecified type" (753.12) were identified as having ADPKD, and linked one-to-one with individuals without ADPKD based on age and gender. Zero-inflated negative binomial models estimated incremental health care resource utilization and expenditures, adjusting for risk factors. RESULTS: A total of 3,844 individuals with ADPKD who satisfied selection criteria were linked one-to-one with 3,844 individuals without ADPKD. Multivariate, regression models adjusting for risk factors revealed incremental mean (standard error) resource use associated with ADPKD of 0.68 (0.090) hospital days, equal to 68 additional hospital days per 100 ADPKD patients, and 6.9 (0.28) outpatient visits, equal to 690 additional visits per 100 ADPKD patients. Mean (standard error) incremental total expenditures associated with ADPKD were US$8,639 ($470). Mean incremental expenditures were largest for outpatient expenditures at US$4,918 ($198), followed by mean incremental hospital expenditures of US$2,603 ($263), and mean incremental medication expenditures of US$1,589 ($77). Based on sub-group analysis, mean incremental total expenditures were US$2,944 ($417) among ADPKD patients without end-stage renal disease and US$38,962 ($6,181) for those with end-stage renal disease. CONCLUSION: ADPKD was associated with considerable incremental health care resource utilization and expenditures. Significant illness burden was found even before patients reached end-stage renal disease.

Impact of hemophilia B on quality of life in affected men, women, and caregivers-Assessment of patient-reported outcomes in the B-HERO-S study.

INTRODUCTION: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is impaired in patients with hemophilia; however, the impact in mild/moderate hemophilia B and affected women is not well characterized. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate factors that affect HRQoL in adults with hemophilia B and caregivers of affected children. METHODS: US adult patients and caregivers of affected children completed distinct ~1-hour online surveys including patient-reported outcome instruments. RESULTS: In total, 299 adult patients and 150 caregivers participated. Adults with moderate hemophilia reported poorer health status (median EQ-5D-5L index score, 0.63) than those with mild (0.73) or severe (0.74) hemophilia. Women reported greater pain severity than men on the Brief Pain Inventory v2 Short Form (median, 7.00 vs 5.00). Based on the Patient Health Questionnaire, mild or worse depression was observed in >50% of adult respondents, and depression was reported more often in those with moderate and severe hemophilia vs those with mild hemophilia. Most caregivers reported at least mild depression. CONCLUSION: Pain, functional impairment, and depression/anxiety are present at higher-than-expected levels in individuals with hemophilia B. The large proportion of individuals with mild/moderate hemophilia and women with reduced health status suggests significant unmet needs in this population.

Cost of Achieving HbA1c Treatment Targets and Weight Loss Responses with Once-Weekly Semaglutide Versus Dulaglutide in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: The National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys show that many people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in the USA fail to achieve recommended treatment targets. In the SUSTAIN 7 randomized controlled trial, once-weekly semaglutide (0.5 and 1.0 mg) was superior to comparative doses of dulaglutide (0.75 and 1.5 mg) in reducing glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and body weight in people with T2D. The present study estimated the cost per patient achieving HbA1c treatment targets and weight loss responses with once-weekly semaglutide and dulaglutide in the USA. METHODS: Numbers needed to treat and annual cost per patient achieving HbA1c targets (including a triple composite endpoint of HbA1c < 7% without hypoglycemia and no weight gain) or weight loss responses were calculated on the basis of data from SUSTAIN 7 and the annual cost of treatment from a US healthcare payer perspective. RESULTS: More patients reached HbA1c targets with once-weekly semaglutide than with dulaglutide, and once-weekly semaglutide showed lower costs of control for all modeled endpoints. The cost per patient achieving the triple composite endpoint was USD 11,916 with once-weekly semaglutide 1.0 mg and USD 15,204 with dulaglutide 1.5 mg, representing a 28% larger cost with dulaglutide 1.5 mg. The cost of reaching the target was 68% larger with dulaglutide 0.75 mg versus once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg. For each patient achieving an HbA1c < 7%, the cost would be 18% larger with dulaglutide 1.5 mg than with once-weekly semaglutide 1.0 mg. CONCLUSIONS: The cost of bringing one patient to the triple composite endpoint of an HbA1c < 7% without hypoglycemia and no weight gain would be 28% and 68% higher with dulaglutide 1.5 mg relative to once-weekly semaglutide 1.0 mg and dulaglutide 0.75 mg relative to once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg, respectively. Once-weekly semaglutide therefore provides better value for money than dulaglutide for the treatment of people with T2D in the USA. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk A/S.

Management of US men, women, and children with hemophilia and methods and demographics of the Bridging Hemophilia B Experiences, Results and Opportunities into Solutions (B-HERO-S) study.

The Bridging Hemophilia B Experiences, Results and Opportunities Into Solutions (B-HERO-S) initiative was launched in an effort to address specific gaps in the understanding of the psychosocial impact of mild-moderate-severe hemophilia B. The original Hemophilia Experiences, Results and Opportunities (HERO) qualitative study evaluated the needs of people with hemophilia A or B in multiple countries; however, a majority of participants had the more common moderate-severe hemophilia A. The B-HERO-S study was designed in collaboration with the hemophilia community to evaluate the needs of adults with hemophilia B and caregivers of children with hemophilia B, including affected women and caregivers of girls with hemophilia. The report presented here describes participant demographics and comorbidities, as well as treatment regimens and access to treatment. Bleeding symptoms were reported by 27% of mothers of children with hemophilia B who participated. Women were more likely than men to self-report arthritis and depression/anxiety as comorbidities associated with hemophilia B. More adults and children with hemophilia B were on routine treatment than on on-demand treatment, and a high percentage of adults with moderate hemophilia B received routine treatment (86%). Many adults with hemophilia B (78%) and caregivers (69%) expressed concern about access to factor in the next 5 years, and of adults with hemophilia B, women more commonly experienced issues with access to factor in the past than did men (72% vs 44%). The findings of the B-HERO-S study reveal potential unmet needs of some patients with mild-moderate hemophilia B, and the results may be leveraged to inform patient outreach by hemophilia treatment centers and education initiatives.

Unmet needs in the transition to adulthood: 18- to 30-year-old people with hemophilia.

Young adults with hemophilia face unique challenges during the transition to adulthood, including issues associated with switching from pediatric to adult hematology care, building mature interpersonal relationships, and establishing an independent career with an assurance of medical insurance coverage. A greater understanding of these challenges is essential for developing effective strategies to address the specific needs of this population. These challenges may be differentiated from those of older adults with hemophilia in large part because of more extensive childhood prophylaxis and safer factor products, resulting in fewer joint problems and lower rates of HIV and HCV infections. This analysis of the changing nature and unmet needs of today's young adults entering into adult hemophilia treatment centers, as well as potential strategies for optimally addressing these needs, was developed following roundtable discussions between patients, caregivers, hematologists, and other health care professionals participating in comprehensive care. Challenges identified among young adults with hemophilia include psychosocial issues related to maturity, personal responsibility, and increased independence, as well as concerns regarding when and with whom to share information about one's hemophilia, limited awareness of educational and financial resources, and a low perceived value of regular hematology care. The initiatives proposed herein highlight important opportunities for health care professionals at pediatric and adult hemophilia treatment centers, as well as national organizations, community groups, and career counselors, to address key unmet needs of this patient population.