Healthcare resource utilization and cost among individuals with late-onset versus adult-onset Huntington's disease: a claims­based retrospective cohort study.

AIMS: Quantify healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs for individuals with late-onset Huntington's disease (LoHD) and compare these with adult-onset HD (AoHD) and non-HD controls. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used US healthcare claims data from the IBM MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Databases. Individuals newly diagnosed with HD between 1/1/2009 and 12/31/2017 were selected (index date was first HD claim). Individuals ≥60 years of age at the index date were categorized as having LoHD while individuals 21-59 years of age were categorized as having AoHD. Non­HD controls were exact matched 2:1 to LoHD and AoHD cohorts. Individuals were required to have continuous enrollment for ≥12 months pre- and post-index. Twelve-month all-cause HRU and healthcare costs were assessed for each cohort. RESULTS: In total, 763 individuals with LoHD and 1,073 individuals with AoHD were matched with 3,762 non-HD controls. Unadjusted all-cause HRU in the 12 months post-index was higher for individuals with LoHD and AoHD compared with non-HD controls across most service categories. Adjusted all-cause HRU for the LoHD cohort was significantly higher compared with non-HD controls across all service categories. In the 12 months post-index, mean total costs for the LoHD cohort ($29,055) were significantly higher than for non-HD controls (≥60 years old: $17,286; 21-59 years old: $12,688; p <.001) and similar to total costs in the AoHD cohort ($31,701; p =.47). LIMITATIONS: It was not possible to control for differences in HD stage but regression models were adjusted for baseline HRU. Evaluations of costs did not include indirect costs, which are known to be significant components of the wider HD burden. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides the first analysis of HRU and costs in LoHD, demonstrating that individuals with LoHD experience a significantly higher healthcare burden compared with non-HD controls and a similarly high burden compared with individuals with AoHD.

Huntington's disease (HD) usually develops between the ages of 30­50 but can develop earlier/later. This study looked at healthcare use in people who developed HD at age 60 or later in the United States. Researchers found that people who develop HD at age 60 or later have similar health needs to people with adult-onset HD. Furthermore, they have much greater health needs than people of a similar age who do not have HD.

Health care resource utilization and costs among individuals with vs without Huntington disease in a US population.

BACKGROUND: Quantifying the extent of health care resource utilization (HCRU) and costs associated with Huntington disease (HD) is vital for providers, decisionmakers, and payers to understand unmet treatment needs and to ensure limited resources can be used to benefit the maximum number of people with HD. OBJECTIVE: To quantify HCRU and costs for people with HD, overall and by disease stage, and compare these with non-HD controls. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using administrative claims data from the IBM MarketScan Commercial, Multi-State Medicaid, and Medicare Supplemental Databases from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2018. People with an HD claim between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2017, were selected for this analysis and matched with non-HD controls for comparison. The HD cohort and the non-HD controls were exact matched on their follow-up duration and propensity score matched 1:4 to create the final analytical cohort. Index date was the first HD diagnosis for the HD cohort (proxy index date assigned to controls), and all individuals were required to have continuous enrollment for 12 or more months pre-index (baseline) and 3 or more months post-index. Proportions of all-cause HCRU (ie, outpatient visits, inpatient visits, emergency department visits, pharmacy fills, radiology visits, and physical/occupational therapy visits) in the 6-months post-index and HCRU counts and costs per patient per month (PPPM) over the entire follow-up were calculated for each cohort. RESULTS: A total of 2,473 individuals with HD and 9,522 matched non-HD controls were identified. HCRU in 6 months post-index was significantly greater in people with HD compared with non-HD controls for all health care service categories; P < 0.0001. The mean number of HCRU PPPM for all measured healthcare services was significantly higher in people with HD compared with non-HD controls (P < 0.001). Mean total costs (2018 USD PPPM) for the HD cohort ($2,260 [SD = $4,682]) were twice the total costs in the non-HD cohort ($1,056 [SD = $3,078]) (P < 0.0001) and were highest across all disease stages. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides current comprehensive HCRU and cost estimates in individuals with HD relative to those without the disease, thus demonstrating the high economic burden imposed by HD. DISCLOSURES: Dr Ta: Employment with Genentech (at time of study) and stock options with Roche; Dr To: Employment and stock options/dividends with Genentech; Dr Patel: Employment and stock options with Roche/Genentech; Dr Fuller: Employment with CHDI Management/CHDI Foundation; Mr Surinach: Employment with Genesis Research (which receives consulting fees from Genentech/Roche); Dr Abbass: Employment and stock options with Genentech; Dr Exuzides: Employment and stock options with Roche/Genentech; and Ms Luo: Employment with CHDI Management/CHDI Foundation. This study was funded by Genentech Inc. The authors thank Greg Rowe of Chrysalis Medical Communications for providing medical writing support, which was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, in accordance with Good Publication Practice (GPP3) guidelines (http://www.ismpp.org/gpp3).

Healthcare resource utilization and costs in individuals with Huntington's disease by disease stage in a US population.

AIMS: To quantify healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs by disease stage in individuals with Huntington's disease (HD) in a US population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used administrative claims data from the IBM MarketScan Commercial, Multi-State Medicaid, and Medicare Supplemental Databases between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2018. Individuals with an HD claim between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2017 were selected. Index date was the date of first HD diagnosis. Individuals were required to have continuous enrollment for ≥ 12 months pre-index, 3 months post-index, and have no pre-index HD claims. All-cause HRU and costs per patient per month (PPPM) (overall and stratified by disease stage) were assessed for individuals with HD. RESULTS: A total of 2,669 individuals with HD were identified. Of these, 1,432 (53.7%), 689 (25.8%), and 548 (20.5%) had early-, middle-, and late-stage HD at baseline, respectively. Mean HRU PPPM by post-index HD stage increased with disease stage for outpatient visits, pharmacy claims, and HD-related pharmacy claims (p < 0.05 for all). Mean inpatient visits and emergency room visits PPPM were highest in individuals with middle-stage HD (p <0.05 for all). Mean total all-cause healthcare cost PPPM for individuals with HD was $2,889, and it was significantly higher in middle-stage individuals, at $7,988, compared with early- and late-stage individuals, at $3,726 and $5,125, respectively; p <0.0001. LIMITATIONS: In the absence of disease staging information in administrative claims data, staging was based on the presence of clinical markers in claims. Our evaluations didn't include the indirect costs of HD, which may be substantial as HD typically affects people at their peak earning potential. CONCLUSIONS: HRU and costs of care are high among individuals with HD, particularly among those with middle- and late-stage disease. This indicates that the disease burden in HD increases with disease stage, highlighting the need for interventions that can slow or prevent disease progression.

Epidemiology of Huntington's Disease in the United States Medicare and Medicaid Populations.

INTRODUCTION: Huntington's disease (HD) is a rare, genetic, and ultimately fatal neurodegenerative disease, with a devastating impact on individuals and families across generations. Few estimates of HD epidemiology in the United States (US) exist. METHODS: This study employed a retrospective cross-sectional design to examine the epidemiology of HD in the US Medicare and Medicaid beneficiary populations using 2016-2017 claims data from the Medicare 100% Research Identifiable Files (RIFs) and 2014 claims data from the Medicaid Analytic eXtract (MAX) files for 17 states. Medicare beneficiaries ≥65 years with a diagnosis of HD (≥1 claim with ICD-10-CM code G10) in 2017 and Medicaid beneficiaries <65 years with a diagnosis of HD (≥1 claim with ICD-9-CM code 333.4) in 2014 were identified. The study outcomes included the 2017 prevalence proportion and incidence rate of HD in the Medicare population and the 2014 prevalence proportion of HD in the Medicaid population. RESULTS: In the Medicare population, 1,941 prevalent and 819 incident cases of HD were identified in 2017, corresponding to a prevalence proportion of 13.1 per 100,000 persons and incidence rate of 6.1 per 100,000 person-years. In the Medicaid population, 353 prevalent cases of HD were identified in 2014, corresponding to a prevalence proportion of 15.2 per 100,000 persons. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that prevalence and incidence of HD in the US may be higher than previously estimated. This has important implications in raising awareness of HD among providers and payers and ensuring availability of and access to services for HD patients and care partners in the Medicare and Medicaid populations.

Healthcare utilization and cost burden of Huntington's disease among Medicare beneficiaries in the United States.

AIMS: To examine healthcare utilization and costs in a US Medicare population diagnosed with Huntington's disease (HD). METHODS: This was a retrospective matched cohort study using Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) claims data using 2013-2017 Research Identifiable Files. Medicare beneficiaries diagnosed with HD based on the presence of at least one medical claim with an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth or Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9/10-CM) diagnosis code for HD (ICD-9-CM: 333.4; ICD-10-CM: G10) during the identification period (2014-2016). Beneficiaries without HD were drawn from a 5% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries and 1:1 matched to those with HD for comparison. All-cause and HD-related (any utilization related to HD diagnosis or symptoms associated with HD) healthcare utilization and costs were reported. RESULTS: We identified 3,688 matched pairs of beneficiaries with and without HD. Of those with HD, 1,922 (52.1%) were late-stage, 916 (24.8%) were middle-stage, and 850 (23.1%) were early-stage. Mean [SD] annual total healthcare costs were higher for HD beneficiaries than beneficiaries without HD ($41,631 [57,393] vs. $17,222 [31,218], p < .001) and were primarily driven by outpatient pharmacy costs ($19,182 [45,469] vs. $4,318 [11,553], p < .001). In the stratified analysis, total healthcare costs were highest among beneficiaries with late-stage HD (mean [SD] cost: $20,475 [$41,122] for early-stage vs. $29,733 [$44,977] for middle-stage vs. $56,657 [$64,185] for late-stage; p < .001). LIMITATIONS: Results are not generalizable to beneficiaries enrolled in other non-FFS Medicare plans. Administrative claims are intended for billing purposes, not research, and may not capture all symptoms, comorbidities, and other adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: This original, comprehensive analysis of healthcare utilization and economic burden among Medicare beneficiaries with HD found that healthcare needs and associated costs are substantially higher among Medicare beneficiaries who are diagnosed with HD compared to beneficiaries without HD.

Health care resource utilization and costs associated with nonadherence and nonpersistence to antidepressants in major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: Nonadherence and nonpersistence to antidepressants in major depressive disorder (MDD) are common and associated with poor clinical and functional outcomes and increased health care resource utilization (HCRU) and costs. However, contemporary real-world evidence on the economic effect of antidepressant nonadherence and nonpersistence is limited. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of nonadherence and nonpersistence to antidepressants on HCRU and costs in adult patients with MDD enrolled in U.S. commercial and Medicare supplemental insurance plans. METHODS: This was a retrospective new-user cohort study using administrative claims data from the IBM MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental databases from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2018. We identified adult patients with MDD aged ≥ 18 years who initiated antidepressant therapy for a new MDD episode between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2017. Twelve-month total all-cause HCRU and costs (2019 U.S. dollars) were characterized for patients who were adherent/nonadherent and persistent/nonpersistent to antidepressants at 6 months. Adherence was defined as having proportion of days covered (PDC) ≥ 80%, and persistence was defined as having continuous antidepressant therapy without a ≥ 30-day gap. Multivariable negative binomial regression and 2-part models adjusted for baseline characteristics were used to estimate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for HCRU and incremental costs of nonadherence and nonpersistence, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 224,645 patients with MDD (commercial: n = 209,422; Medicare supplemental: n = 15,223) met all study inclusion criteria. Approximately half of patients were nonadherent (commercial: 48%; Medicare supplemental: 50%) or nonpersistent (commercial: 49%; Medicare supplemental: 52%) to antidepressants at 6 months. After controlling for baseline characteristics, nonadherent patients experienced significantly more inpatient hospitalizations (commercial, adjusted IRR [95% CI]: 1.34 [1.29 to 1.39]; Medicare supplemental: 1.19 [1.12 to 1.28]) and emergency room (ER) visits (commercial, adjusted IRR [95% CI]: 1.43 [1.40 to 1.45]; Medicare supplemental: 1.28 [1.21 to 1.36]) compared with adherent patients. Similar results were observed in nonpersistent patients. Adjusted mean differences revealed that nonadherent and nonpersistent patients accumulated significantly higher medical costs (commercial: $568 [95% CI: $354 to $764] and $491 [$284 to $703]; Medicare supplemental: $1,621 [$314 to $2,774] and $1,764 [$451 to $2,925]), inpatient costs (commercial: $650 [$490 to $801] and $564 [$417 to $716]; Medicare supplemental: $1,546 [$705 to $2,308] and $1,567 [$778 to $2,331]), and ER costs (commercial: $130 [$115 to $143] and $129 [$115 to $142]; Medicare supplemental: $82 [$23 to $150] and $80 [$18 to $150]), and incurred significantly lower pharmacy costs (commercial: -$561 [-$601 to -$521] and -$576 [-$616 to -$540]; Medicare supplemental: -$510 [-$747 to -$227] and -$596 [-$830 to -$325]) compared with adherent and persistent patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study found more hospitalizations and ER use and higher total medical costs among patients who were nonadherent and nonpersistent to antidepressants at 6 months. Strategies that promote better adherence and persistence may lower HCRU and medical costs in patients with MDD. DISCLOSURES: This study was sponsored by Allergan, which was involved in the study design; data collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; and decision to present these results. Ta was supported by a training grant provided to the University of Washington by Allergan at the time this study was conducted. Tung and Gillard are employees of Allergan. Oliveri is an employee of Genesis Research. Sullivan and Devine have no financial disclosures. This study was presented as a poster at AMCP 2020 (Virtual Meeting), April 21-24, 2020.

Direct Costs Incurred Among Women Undergoing Surgical Procedures to Treat Uterine Fibroids.

BACKGROUND: Uterine fibroids (UF) affect up to 70%-80% of women by 50 years of age and represent a substantial economic burden on patients and society. Despite the high costs associated with UF, recent studies on the costs of UF-related surgical treatments remain limited. OBJECTIVE: To describe the health care resource utilization (HCRU) and all-cause costs among women diagnosed with UF who underwent UF-related surgery. METHODS: Data from the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters database and Medicaid Multi-State database were independently, retrospectively analyzed from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2015. Women aged 18-64 years with ≥ 1 UF claim from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2014, a claim for a UF-related surgery (hysterectomy, myomectomy, uterine artery embolization [UAE], or ablation) from January 1, 2010, to November 30, 2015, and continuous enrollment for ≥ 1 year presurgery and ≥ 30 days postsurgery qualified for study inclusion. A 1-year period before the date of the first UF-related surgical claim after the first UF diagnosis was used to report baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. Surgery characteristics were reported. All-cause HCRU and costs (adjusted to 2017 U.S. dollars) were described by the 14 days pre-, peri-, and 30 days postoperative periods, and independently by the inpatient or outpatient setting. RESULTS: Overall, 113,091 patients were included in this study: commercial database, n = 103,814; Medicaid database, n = 9,277. Median time from the initial UF diagnosis to first UF-related surgical procedure was 33 days for the commercial population and 47 days for the Medicaid population. Hysterectomy was the most common UF-related surgery received after UF diagnosis (commercial, 68% [n = 70,235]; Medicaid, 75% [n = 6,928]). In both populations, 97% of patients had ≥ 1 outpatient visit from 14 days presurgery to 30 days postsurgery (commercial, n = 100,402; Medicaid, n = 9,023), and the majority of all UF-related surgeries occurred in the outpatient setting (commercial, 64% [n = 66,228]; Medicaid, 66% [n = 6,090]). Mean total all-cause costs for patients with UF who underwent any UF-related surgery were $15,813 (SD $13,804) in the commercial population (n = 95,433) and $11,493 (SD $26,724) in the Medicaid population (n = 4,785). Mean total all-cause costs for UF-related surgeries for the commercial/Medicaid populations were $17,450 (SD $13,483)/$12,273 (SD $19,637) for hysterectomy, $14,216 (SD $16,382)/$11,764 (SD $15,478) for myomectomy, $17,163 (SD $13,527)/$12,543 (SD $23,777) for UAE, $8,757 (SD $9,369)/$7,622 (SD $50,750) for ablation, and $12,281 (SD $10,080)/$5,989 (SD $5,617) for myomectomy and ablation. Mean total all-cause costs for any UF-related surgery performed in the outpatient setting in the commercial and Medicaid populations were $14,396 (SD $11,466) and $6,720 (SD $10,374), respectively, whereas costs in the inpatient setting were $18,345 (SD $16,910) and $21,805 (SD $43,244), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis indicated that surgical treatment options for UF continue to represent a substantial financial burden. This underscores the need for alternative, cost-effective treatments for the management of UF. DISCLOSURES: This study was sponsored by Allergan, Dublin, Ireland. Allergan played a role in the conduct, analysis, interpretation, writing of the report, and decision to publish this study. Harrington and Ye are employees of Allergan. Stafkey-Mailey, Fuldeore, and Yue are employees of Xcenda. Ta was a contractor at Allergan at the time the study was conducted and is currently supported by a training grant from Allergan. Bonine, Shih, and Gillard are employees of Allergan and have stock, stock options, and/or restricted stock units as employees of Allergan. Banks has no disclosures to report. This study was presented as a poster at Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy Nexus 2017; October 16-19, 2017; Dallas, TX.

Is There a Relationship Between Part D Medication Adherence and Part C Intermediate Outcomes Star Ratings Measures?

BACKGROUND: Improvements in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) star ratings Part D medication adherence measures may affect performance in Part C intermediate outcome measures for which the Part D targeted medication classes are prescribed. OBJECTIVE: To determine if Part D medication adherence measures are associated with corresponding Part C intermediate outcome measures. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional analysis using the CMS 2015 star ratings report (based on 2013 benefit year plan data) for Medicare contracts. The measures of interest included the Part D adherence measures for diabetes medications, antihypertensive agents, and statins and the Part C intermediate outcome measures for controlled blood sugar, blood pressure, and cholesterol. All Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug (MAPD) contracts with complete data for all Part C and D measures of interest were included. Contracts with ≥ 25% of total enrollment with MA-only benefit were excluded. Linear and logistic regression models were used to assess the association between 2015 Part D adherence measures and Part C intermediate outcome measures (n = 366). The regression models were adjusted for low-income subsidy (LIS) beneficiary enrollment and log-transformed (natural logarithm) total contract enrollment. RESULTS: Bivariate linear regression models demonstrated moderate positive associations between each of the 2015 Part D adherence scores and related 2015 Part C measures that explained 27%-29% (R(2)) of variance. Including LIS and total contract enrollment in the regression models increased the R2 to 30%-36%. The multivariate logistic regression models showed that each percentage point of improvement in the 2015 Part D adherence measures was associated with a 4.13 to 4.69 greater odds of performing in the top quartile in corresponding 2015 Part C measures. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate positive associations were observed between the Part D and Part C scores in the same benefit year. MAPD plans may observe improved Part C intermediate outcome measures with strategies that improve Part D medication adherence measures. DISCLOSURES: This study was conducted by MedImpact Healthcare Systems, San Diego, California, without external funding. All authors are employees of MedImpact Healthcare Systems. Erickson reports advisory board fees from Sanofi and AstraZeneca. Ta, Erickson, and Patel were responsible for study concept and design and data interpretation, with assistance from Qiu. Qiu and Ta took the lead in data collection, assisted by Erickson. Ta wrote the manuscript, which was revised by Erickson and Patel.