Real-World Treatment Patterns among Patients with Alopecia Areata in the USA: A Retrospective Claims Analysis.

Alopecia areata is an autoimmune disorder characterized by hair loss, for which there are few treatment options. This claims-based study characterized recent real-world treatment patterns among patients in the USA with alopecia areata, including the subtypes alopecia totalis and alopecia universalis, in the first year after diagnosis of an episode of alopecia areata. Approximately 5% of all patients (adults (age ≥ 18 years), n = 7,703; adolescents (age 12-17 years), n = 595) had alopecia totalis or alopecia universalis. Corticosteroids were the most common first-line (1L) and second-line (2L) treatments. The mean time from diagnosis of alopecia areata to initiation of 1L treatment was 2.2 days for adults and 2.6 days for adolescents; mean 1L duration was 76.9 and 64.3 days, respectively. For adults (57.5%) and adolescents (59.7%) with 2L therapy, the mean time from 1L discontinuation to 2L initiation was 57.2 and 53.6 days, respectively; the mean duration of 2L treatment was 55.5 and 50.1 days, respectively. More patients with vs without alopecia totalis or alopecia universalis initiated 2L therapy (adults: 71.9% vs 56.8%; adolescents: 71.4% vs 58.9%). The proportion of days covered during the first year post-diagnosis was 36.7% (adults) and 34.1% (adolescents). These results highlight the substantial disease burden of alopecia areata and a need for more effective treatments.

Patient characteristics associated with all-cause healthcare costs of alopecia areata in the United States.

Evidence on the factors of medical costs involved in the care of people with alopecia areata (AA) is limited, but mounting evidence points to significant variation in financial impact for patients with AA in the absence of effective treatments. This study explored drivers of medical costs among privately insured adults and adolescents with AA in the United States. The study found that patients of middle age (45­64 years), located in the Northeast region, with comprehensive health insurance, with greater extent of hair loss, or with other health disorders face greater all-cause medical costs. Adult females of young (18­44 years) and older (65+ years) age also faced greater costs on average. This research confirms high variability in the burden of AA, pointing to population subgroups that may be more affected by the disease and its commonly associated disorders.

Trends in Prevalence and Incidence of Alopecia Areata, Alopecia Totalis, and Alopecia Universalis Among Adults and Children in a US Employer-Sponsored Insured Population.

Importance: Alopecia areata (AA) is characterized by nonscarring hair loss of the scalp, face, and/or body. Alopecia totalis (AT) and alopecia universalis (AU) involve complete loss of the scalp and body hair, respectively. The epidemiology of AA in the US remains unclear, having previously been extrapolated from older studies that were limited to specific geographic areas or clinical settings, or from self-reported data. Objective: To estimate the annual prevalence and incidence of AA and AT and/or AU (AT/AU) in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, population-based cohort study was conducted from January 2016 to December 2019 and included enrollees in the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters and Medicare Supplemental databases and their dependents, with plan enrollment during each study calendar year and the year prior. Exposures: Prevalent cases were identified by 1 or more claims for AA or AT/AU (International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-10-CM] codes L63.x, L63.0, L63.1) during each year of interest or the year prior. Incident cases were identified by 1 or more claims for AA or AT/AU during a specific year and no diagnosis the year prior. Main Outcomes and Measures: Annual incidence and prevalence rates were calculated and stratified by age, sex, and region. National employer-sponsored insurance population estimates were obtained using population-based weights. Results: Among eligible patients (2016: n = 18 368 [mean (SD) age, 40.6 (17.9) years; 12 295 women (66.9%)]; 2017: n = 14 372 [mean (SD) age, 39.6 (17.7) years; 9195 women (64.0%)]; 2018: n = 14 231 [mean (SD) age, 38.9 (17.3) years; 8998 women (63.2%)]; 2019: n = 13 455 [mean (SD) age, 39.1 (17.4) years; 8322 women (61.9%)]), AA prevalence increased from 0.199% (95% CI, 0.198%-0.200%) in 2016 to 0.222% (95% CI, 0.221%-0.223%) in 2019. Roughly 5% to 10% of prevalent and incident cases of AA were AT/AU. The prevalence of AT/AU increased from 0.012% (95% CI, 0.012%-0.013%) to 0.019% (95% CI, 0.018%-0.019%) from 2016 to 2019. Incidence of AA per 100 000 person-years ranged from 87.39 (95% CI, 86.84-87.96) in 2017 to 92.90 (95% CI, 92.35-93.45) in 2019. Incidence of AT/AU ranged from 7.09 (95% CI, 6.94-7.25) in 2017 to 8.92 (95% CI, 8.75-9.09) in 2016. Prevalence and incidence of AA and AT/AU were higher among female vs male individuals, adults vs children and adolescents, and in the Northeast vs other regions. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this cohort study suggest that these recent AA prevalence and incidence estimates could help improve current understanding of the disease burden. Further research is warranted to elucidate subpopulation differences and trends in AA in the broader US population.

Healthcare Utilization and Costs Among US Adolescents With Alopecia Areata.

Background: Alopecia areata (AA) is an autoimmune disease of hair loss affecting people of all ages. Alopecia totalis (AT) and universalis (AU) involve scalp and total body hair loss, respectively. AA significantly affects quality of life, but evidence on the economic burden in adolescents is limited. Objectives: To assess healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and all-cause direct healthcare costs, including out-of-pocket (OOP) costs, of US adolescents with AA. Methods: IBM MarketScan® Commercial and Medicare databases were used to identify patients aged 12-17 years with ≥2 claims with AA/AT/AU diagnosis (prevalent cases), from October 1, 2015, to March 31, 2018, enrolled for ≥12 months before and after the first AA diagnosis (index). Patients were matched 1:3 to non-AA controls on index year, demographics, plan type, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Per patient per year HCRU and costs were compared post-index. Results: Patients comprised 130 AT/AU adolescents and 1105 non-AT/AU adolescents (53.8% female; mean age, 14.6 years). Post-index, AT/AU vs controls had more outpatient (14.5 vs 7.1) and dermatologist (3.6 vs 0.3) visits, higher mean plan costs ($9397 vs $2267), including medical ($7480 vs $1780) and pharmacy ($1918 vs $487) costs, and higher OOP costs ($2081 vs $751) (all P<.001). The non-AT/AU cohort vs controls had more outpatient (11.6 vs 8.0) and dermatologist (3.4 vs 0.4) visits, higher mean plan costs ($7587 vs $4496), and higher OOP costs ($1579 vs $805) (all P<.001). Discussion: This large-sample, real-world analysis found that adolescents with prevalent AA had significantly higher HCRU and all-cause costs than matched controls. The greater burden was driven by more frequent outpatient visits, and higher payer medical and pharmacy costs in comparison with controls. Oral corticosteroid use was higher among patients with AT/AU; topical and injectable corticosteroid use was higher for non-AT/AU. Although the data preclude the identification of AA-attributable costs, the matched-control design allows an estimation of incremental all-cause costs associated with AA. Conclusions: Adolescents with AA incurred substantial incremental healthcare costs, with greater costs incurred among those with AT/AU. Study findings suggest that AA incurs costs as a medical condition with a high burden on adolescent patients and health plans.

Real-world healthcare resource utilization and costs associated with tisagenlecleucel and axicabtagene ciloleucel among patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: an analysis of hospital data in the United States.

This study compared the real-world healthcare resource utilization (HRU), costs, adverse events (AEs), and AE treatments associated with the chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies, tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) and axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel), for relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (r/r DLBCL). Adults with DLBCL who received tisa-cel or axi-cel were identified in the Premier Healthcare Database (2017-2020). Non-CAR-T costs, HRU, and AE rates during the infusion and follow-up periods were compared between the tisa-cel and axi-cel cohorts. Of 119 patients, 33 received tisa-cel (86% as inpatient infusion) and 86 received axi-cel (100% inpatient). Tisa-cel was associated with significantly shorter mean inpatient length of stay than axi-cel during infusion (11.3 vs. 18.3 days) and follow-up ([monthly] 3.9 vs. 6.9 days). Non-CAR-T costs were significantly lower for tisa-cel compared with axi-cel during infusion ($27594.8 vs. $51378.3) and follow-up ([monthly] $28777.3 vs. $46575.7; both p< .05). Rates of AEs and AE treatments were similar.

All-cause health care resource utilization and costs among adults with alopecia areata: A retrospective claims database study in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Alopecia areata (AA) is an autoimmune disorder characterized by hair loss. Patients may present with hair loss of the scalp, eyelashes, eyebrows, and/or body. Alopecia totalis (AT), total scalp hair loss, or alopecia universalis (AU), total body hair loss, are extensive forms. Although the impact of AA on quality of life is understood, evidence of its economic burden is limited. A better understanding of the all-cause health care costs for health plans and patients with AA is critical to comprehend disease burden. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate all-cause health care resource utilization and direct health care costs in US adults with AA with or without AT or AU, vs matched control subjects. METHODS: Patients (≥ 18 years) with AA with no less than 2 claims of AA at diagnosis (October 31, 2015, to March 3, 2018) were identified in the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters and Medicare Supplemental databases. Patients were enrolled no less than 12 months before and after first diagnosis (index). Patients were grouped according to AT or AU status (AT/AU group) or AA without AT/AU (non-AT/AU group) and matched 1:3 to control subjects without AA/AT/AU. Summary statistics were calculated for demographic and clinical characteristics at baseline and follow-up. RESULTS: At baseline, there were 14,972 adult patients with AA and 44,916 control subjects. Of patients with AA, 1,250 and 13,722 were in the AT/AU and non-AT/AU groups, respectively. A significantly greater proportion of patients with AA had atopic and autoimmune comorbidities vs control subjects. After index, patients with AA used significantly more corticosteroid treatments (injectable/oral/topical) than control subjects. A greater mean number of annual outpatient and dermatologist visits was observed for both AA groups vs control subjects (outpatient visits: AT/AU group: 17.8 vs 11.8; non-AT/AU group: 15.4 vs 11.2; dermatologist visits: AT/AU group: 3.4 vs 0.4; non-AT/AU group: 3.4 vs 0.4; P < 0.001 for all). Mean total all-cause medical and pharmacy costs (2018 US$) were higher in both AA groups vs control subjects (AT/AU group: $18,988 vs $11,030; non-AT/AU group: $13,686 vs $9,336; P < 0.001 for both). Patient out-of-pocket costs were higher for AA vs control subjects (AT/AU group: $2,685 vs $1,457; non-AT/AU group: $2,223 vs $1,341; P < 0.001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with control subjects, patients with AA are more likely to have atopic and autoimmune comorbidities, to use corticosteroids, and to make outpatient visits. Patients with AA have greater all-cause medical (including pharmacy) and out-of-pocket costs. The difference in total medical costs for patients with AT/AU vs control subjects is higher than the difference for patients with non-AT/AU vs control subjects. DISCLOSURES: This study was sponsored by Pfizer Inc. Pfizer Inc was involved in the study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing of the report; and the decision to submit this report for publication. A. Mostaghimi reports consulting fees from Pfizer Inc, Concert, Lilly, AbbVie, hims, and Digital Diagnostics; reports equity from Lucid and hims; and is an associate editor at JAMA Dermatology. K. Gandhi, M. Ray, and V. Sikirica are former employees of Pfizer Inc and held stock and/or stock options with Pfizer Inc at the time of writing. N. Done, W. Gao, C. Carley, T. Wang, and E. Swallow are employees of Analysis Group, Inc, a consultancy that received payment from Pfizer Inc for participation in this analysis.

The Economic Burden of Recurrence in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Among Working Age Patients in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is associated with a high recurrence risk. However, the magnitude of direct and indirect costs associated with recurrence is lacking in the literature. METHODS: Adults 18-65 years old diagnosed with TNBC were identified from the OptumHealth Reporting and Insights claims database (1999-2017) and stratified by recurrence. For patients with recurrence, the index date was defined as 30 days before recurrence; for patients without recurrence, it was randomly assigned based on the distribution of time between first treatments and index dates of the recurrence cohort. All-cause and breast cancer-related healthcare resource utilization (HRU), direct and indirect costs, and work loss up to 1 year were compared between cohorts using generalized linear models. Kaplan-Meier analyses and Cox proportional hazards models compared the risk of leaving the workforce. RESULTS: Among the 2340 patients analyzed, mean age was 54 years and > 75% of patients had stage 0-2 cancer. Among the 1170 patients with recurrence, 236 were categorized as having metastatic recurrence and 934 as having locoregional recurrence. Relative to patients without recurrence, those with recurrence had significantly higher all-cause and breast cancer-related HRU. For instance, adjusted incidence rates (IRs) for all-cause inpatient admissions were 3.67 and 10.19 times higher for patients with locoregional and metastatic recurrence, respectively (p < 0.001). Adjusted all-cause healthcare costs were $8575/month higher for metastatic recurrence and $3609/month higher for locoregional recurrence vs. patients without recurrence (p < 0.001). Adjusted IRs for work loss days were approximately two times higher for locoregional and metastatic recurrence vs. without recurrence (p < 0.001). Patients with locoregional recurrence incurred $335/month more indirect costs vs. patients without recurrence; those with metastatic recurrence incurred $769/month more (p < 0.05). Patients with recurrence had a 63% higher rate of leaving the work force (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: The incremental direct and indirect economic burden associated with recurrent TNBC is substantial relative to non-recurrence.