Lifetime cost-effectiveness simulation of once-weekly exenatide in type 2 diabetes: A cost-utility analysis based on the EXSCEL trial.

AIMS: The Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL) trial assessed once-weekly exenatide (EQW) vs. placebo, added to usual care in 14,752 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01144338). We assessed the lifetime cost-effectiveness of adding EQW vs. usual care alone from a healthcare perspective. METHODS: Medical resource use and EQ-5D utilities were collected throughout the study. Within-trial results were extrapolated to a lifetime horizon using the UK Prospective Diabetes Study Outcomes Model version 2 (UKPDS-OM2), predicting predict cardiovascular and microvascular events. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated separately for US and UK settings, with outcomes measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). RESULTS: EQW plus usual care gained 0.162 QALYs at an additional cost of $41,545/patient, compared with usual care in a US setting. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $259,223/QALY. In a UK setting, the QALY gain was 0.151 at an additional cost of £6357: an ICER of £42,589/QALY. Sensitivity analyses ranged between $34,369-$269,571 and £3430-£46,560 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: In a lifetime extrapolation, adding EQW to usual care increased QALYs and costs compared with usual care alone. The base-case ICERs exceeded the commonly-cited cost-effectiveness thresholds of $100,000/QALY and £20,000/QALY. However, ICERs were considerably lower in some subgroups, and in sensitivity analyses.

Assessment of The High risk and unmEt Need in patients with CAD and type 2 diabetes (ATHENA): US healthcare resource use, cost, and burden of illness in a commercially insured population.

AIMS: THEMIS (NCT01991795) demonstrated cardioprotective benefits of ticagrelor plus acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) compared with placebo plus ASA in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), stable coronary artery disease (CAD) and no history of myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke. To complement these findings, we assessed clinical outcomes and healthcare costs in commercially insured US patients similar to those in THEMIS. METHODS: This retrospective, observational study used data from Optum. The T2D-CAD cohort (n = 154,369) included patients (≥50 years old) either with high cardiovascular risk or taking a P2Y12 inhibitor. The THEMIS-like cohort (n = 126,938) comprised patients (≥50 years old) at high cardiovascular risk; the THEMIS-PCI-like cohort comprised a subset of these patients with prior percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (n = 18,394). RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 2.4-2.5 years. Incidence rates of the composite outcome (death, MI, and stroke) were 6.56 (95% CI 6.50-6.63), 6.21 (6.14-6.28), and 5.57 (5.39-5.74) per 100 person-years, and annualized healthcare costs per patient were US$15,848, US$16,044, and US$20,934 for the T2D-CAD, THEMIS-like, and THEMIS-PCI-like cohorts, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Commercially insured patients similar to those in THEMIS had high cardiovascular event rates and healthcare costs, highlighting a need for improved preventive strategies.

Assessing the cost-effectiveness of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in type 2 diabetes mellitus: A comprehensive economic evaluation using clinical trial and real-world evidence.

AIMS: The economic burden of diabetes is driven by the management of vascular complications. Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) have demonstrated reductions in cardiovascular and renal complications, including hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) and renal disease progression, in randomized clinical trials. The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the SGLT2i class versus standard of care in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), using evidence from both clinical trial and real-world studies. METHODS: An established T2DM model was adapted to use contemporary outcomes evidence from real-world studies and randomized controlled trial evaluations of SGLT2i, and extrapolated over a lifetime for HHF, myocardial infarction, stroke, end-stage renal disease and all-cause mortality. The economic analysis considered adults with T2DM, with and without established cardiovascular disease, and was conducted over a lifetime from the perspective of the health care payer in the United Kingdom, United States and China, discounted at country-specific rates. RESULTS: SGLT2i were consistently associated with increased treatment costs, reduced complication costs and gains in quality-adjusted life years driven by differences in projected life expectancy, cardiovascular and microvascular morbidity and weight loss. SGLT2i were estimated to be cost-saving or cost-effective at relevant thresholds for the overall population in the United Kingdom, United States and China, with cost-effectiveness being the greatest in higher risk subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the need to take into account cost savings from reducing common, morbid and preventable T2DM complications when considering the cost of diabetes medications.

Assessment of the high risk and unmet need in patients with CAD and type 2 diabetes (ATHENA): US healthcare resource utilization, cost and burden of illness in the Diabetes Collaborative Registry.

BACKGROUND: THEMIS (NCT01991795) showed that in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and stable coronary artery disease (CAD) but with no prior myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke, ticagrelor plus acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) decreased the incidence of ischaemic cardiovascular events compared with placebo plus ASA. To complement these findings, we assessed disease burden and healthcare resource utilization (HRU) in US patients with CAD and T2D, but without a prior MI or stroke. METHODS: This observational study used 2013-2014 data from the Diabetes Collaborative Registry linked to Medicare administrative claims. Two cohorts of patients with T2D were studied: patients at high cardiovascular risk (THEMIS-like cohort; N = 56 040) and patients at high cardiovascular risk or taking P2Y12 inhibitors (CAD-T2D cohort; N = 69 790). Outcomes included the composite of all-cause death, MI and stroke; the individual events from the composite endpoint; HRU; and costs. RESULTS: Median age was 73.0 years, and median follow-up was 1.3 years in both cohorts. Event rates of the composite outcome were 16.34 (95% confidence interval: 16.31-16.37) and 17.64 (17.61-17.67) per 100 person-years for the THEMIS-like and CAD-T2D cohorts, respectively. The incidence rate of bleeding events was 0.13 events per 100 person-years in both cohorts. Healthcare costs per patient-year were USD 8741 and USD 9150 in the THEMIS-like and CAD-T2D cohorts, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in the THEMIS-like cohort and the broader CAD-T2D population had similarly substantial cardiovascular event rates and healthcare costs, indicating that patients with CAD and T2D similar to the THEMIS population are at an increased cardiovascular risk.

Within-Trial Evaluation of Medical Resources, Costs, and Quality of Life Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Participating in the Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL).

OBJECTIVE: To compare medical resource use, costs, and health utilities for 14,752 patients with type 2 diabetes who were randomized to once-weekly exenatide (EQW) or placebo in addition to usual diabetes care in the Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Medical resource use data and responses to the EuroQol 5-Dimension (EQ-5D) instrument were collected at baseline and throughout the trial. Medical resources and medications were assigned values by using U.S. Medicare payments and wholesale acquisition costs, respectively. Secondary analyses used English costs. RESULTS: Patients were followed for an average of 3.3 years, during which time those randomized to EQW experienced 0.41 fewer inpatient days (7.05 vs. 7.46 days; relative rate ratio 0.91; P = 0.05). Rates of outpatient medical visits were similar, as were total inpatient and outpatient costs. Mean costs for nonstudy diabetes medications over the study period were ∼$1,600 lower with EQW than with placebo (P = 0.01). Total within-study costs, excluding study medication, were lower in the EQW arm than in the placebo arm ($28,907 vs. $30,914; P ≤ 0.01). When including the estimated cost of EQW, total mean costs were significantly higher in the EQW group than in the placebo group ($42,697 vs. $30,914; P < 0.01). With English costs applied, mean total costs, including exenatide costs, were £1,670 higher in the EQW group than the placebo group (£10,874 vs. £9,204; P < 0.01). There were no significant differences in EQ-5D health utilities between arms over time. CONCLUSIONS: Medical costs were lower in the EQW arm than the placebo arm, but total costs were significantly higher once the cost of branded exenatide was incorporated.

Patient-reported outcomes of dual bronchodilator fixed-dose combination versus bronchodilator monotherapy in individuals with COPD.

Background: This study compared real-world patient-reported outcomes (PROs) measured by the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ), the London Chest Activities of Daily Living (LCADL) scale, and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) questionnaire between individuals with COPD initiating LAMA/LABA fixed-dose combination (FDC) dual therapy versus either long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) or long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) monotherapy. Methods: Individuals with COPD aged ≥40 years initiating a LAMA/LABA FDC dual therapy or a LAMA or LABA monotherapy (index date = first prescription date) between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2016 were identified from a large US administrative claims database. Individuals were excluded if they were prescribed an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) or ICS/LABA two months prior to the index date or were diagnosed with cystic fibrosis, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, or asthma. The cohorts were propensity score matched (PSM) 1:1 for COPD severity using baseline measures. Each participant completed a survey. Results: Surveys were completed by 399 participants in the dual therapy cohort, and 718 participants in the monotherapy cohort. Following PSM, 379 participants remained in each cohort for analysis (monotherapy: 369 LAMA and 10 LABA). The dual therapy cohort reported fewer COPD-related symptoms (CCQ symptom score 2.75 vs 2.97, respectively, P=0.023), and, fewer limitations in leisure activities (LCADL leisure score 4.78 vs 5.17, respectively, P=0.021) versus the monotherapy cohort. No significant differences were found in the WPAI. A greater percentage of participants in the dual therapy cohort stayed on index therapy (63.1%) when compared with the monotherapy cohort (30.3%, P<0.0001). Conclusions: Only 30% of the participants prescribed monotherapy, usually with a LAMA, remained on index therapy alone at the time of survey administration. In the dual therapy cohort, 63% of the participants remained on the index medication and had fewer COPD-related symptoms and fewer limitations in leisure activities compared with participants in the monotherapy cohort.

Eligibility of patients with type 2 diabetes for sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor cardiovascular outcomes trials: An assessment using the Diabetes Collaborative Registry.

Generalizability of findings from cardiovascular outcomes trials (CVOTs) to patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in clinical practice is unknown. We assessed the proportions of patients in the Diabetes Collaborative Registry who would have met enrolment criteria for pivotal CVOTs of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is): EMPA-REG OUTCOME, CANVAS, DECLARE and VERTIS CV. In 172 643 patients, mean [standard deviation (SD)] age and HbA1c were 68.1 (11.8) years and 7.8% (2.2), respectively; 56.8% of patients were men and SGLT-2i use was 4.4%. Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) prevalence was 64.3% and mean 10-year ASCVD risk was 28.6% in patients without ASCVD. Proportions of patients eligible for CVOTs ranged from 26% (EMPA-REG OUTCOME) to 44% (DECLARE); 48% of patients were ineligible for all CVOTs. Mean (SD) ASCVD risk was 25.4% (22.6), 32.1% (20.6) and 37.7% (19.4) in patients eligible for no, one or two CVOTs, respectively. SGLT-2i use was low in patients eligible for no CVOTs (3.5%) and at least one CVOT (5.2%). In conclusion, applicability of CVOT results to patients with T2D in clinical practice varies based on trial eligibility criteria.

Impact of a novel pharmacist-delivered behavioral intervention for patients with poorly-controlled diabetes: The ENhancing outcomes through Goal Assessment and Generating Engagement in Diabetes Mellitus (ENGAGE-DM) pragmatic randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Many factors contribute to suboptimal diabetes control including insufficiently-intensive treatment and non-adherence to medication and lifestyle. Determining which of these is most relevant for individual patients is challenging. Patient engagement techniques may help identify contributors to suboptimal adherence and address barriers (using motivational interviewing) and help facilitate choices among treatment augmentation options (using shared decision-making). These methods have not been used in combination to improve diabetes outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of a telephone-based patient-centered intervention on glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) control for individuals with poorly-controlled diabetes. DESIGN: Two-arm pragmatic randomized control trial within an explanatory sequential mixed-methods design. SUBJECTS: 1,400 participants 18-64 years old with poorly-controlled type 2 diabetes. INTERVENTION: The intervention was delivered over the telephone by a clinical pharmacist and consisted of a 2-step process that integrated brief negotiated interviewing and shared decision-making to identify patient goals and options for enhancing diabetes management. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was change in HbA1c. Secondary outcomes were medication adherence measures. Outcomes were evaluated using intention-to-treat principles; multiple imputation was used for missing values in the 12-month follow-up. We used information from pharmacist notes to elicit factors to potentially explain the intervention's effectiveness. KEY RESULTS: Participants had a mean age of 54.7 years (SD:8.3) and baseline HbA1c of 9.4 (SD:1.6). Change in HbA1c from baseline was -0.79 (SD:2.01) in the control arm and -0.75 (SD:1.76) in the intervention arm (difference:+0.04, 95%CI: -0.22, 0.30). There were no significant differences in adherence. In as-treated analyses, the intervention significantly improved diabetes control (-0.48, 95%CI: -0.91, -0.05). Qualitative findings provided several potential explanations for the findings, including insufficiently addressing patient barriers. CONCLUSIONS: A novel telephone-based patient-centered intervention did not improve HbA1c among individuals with poorly-controlled diabetes, though as-treated analyses suggest that the intervention was effective for those who received it. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02910089.

Differences in health care outcomes between postdischarge COPD patients treated with inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2-agonist via dry-powder inhalers and pressurized metered-dose inhalers.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to examine real-world differences in health care resource use (HRU) and costs among COPD patients in the USA treated with a dry powder inhaler (DPI) or pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) following a COPD-related hospitalization. METHODS: This retrospective analysis used the Truven MarketScan® databases. Eligibility criteria included 1) age ≥40 years, 2) COPD diagnosis, 3) inpatient admission with a diagnosis of COPD exacerbation, 4) inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting ß2-agonist (LABA) prescription within 10 days of hospital discharge (index date), and 5) continuous enrollment for 12 months preindex and 90 days postindex. Outcomes included pre- and postindex HRU and costs. DPI and pMDI groups were compared on postindex outcomes via multivariate models controlling for demographic and baseline characteristics. RESULTS: The sample included 1,960 DPI and 1,086 pMDI ICS/LABA patients. During the preindex period, pMDI patients were significantly more likely to be prescribed a short-acting ß-agonist, experienced more COPD exacerbation-related hospital days, and had a greater number of pulmonologist visits compared to DPI patients (P<0.05), all suggestive of greater disease severity. However, multivariate models revealed that pMDI patients incurred 10% lower all-cause postindex costs (predicted mean costs [2016 US dollars]: $2,673 vs $2,956) and 19% lower COPD-related costs (predicted mean costs: $138 vs $169; P<0.05). Additionally, pMDI patients were 28% less likely to experience a COPD exacerbation-related hospital readmission within 60 days postdischarge compared to the DPI patients (OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.52-0.99, P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Despite greater COPD-related HRU and costs preceding index hospitalization, US patients using a pMDI after hospital discharge incurred significantly lower all-cause and COPD-related health care costs compared with those using a DPI, in addition to a decreased likelihood of a COPD exacerbation-related hospital readmission. Results suggest that inhaler device type may influence COPD outcomes and that COPD patients may derive greater clinical benefit from treatment delivered via pMDI vs DPI.

Comparison of healthcare resource utilization and costs in patients with type 2 diabetes initiating dapagliflozin versus sitagliptin.

AIMS: To compare healthcare costs and utilization in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who initiated dapagliflozin (DAPA) with costs and utilization in those who initiated sitagliptin (SITA) in a real-world setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study of health plan enrollees in two US commercial claims databases or Medicare Part D. The study population comprised adult patients with T2D who initiated DAPA or SITA between January 1, 2014 and April 30, 2015. DAPA and SITA initiators were propensity-score-matched, and healthcare utilization and costs during the 1-year follow-up period were compared. Analyses were conducted separately for patients with evidence of oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) monotherapy use at baseline. RESULTS: A total of 2722 patients were included in each matched cohort. Follow-up unadjusted all-cause costs ($16 065 and $17 281; P = 0.135) and diabetes-related costs ($9697 and $9354; P = 0.539) were similar in the DAPA and SITA cohorts. Higher office and outpatient visit costs in the SITA group were offset by higher pharmacy costs in the DAPA group. In the subgroup of 1804 patients with OAD monotherapy use at baseline, patients in the SITA group had higher total all-cause costs compared with those in the DAPA group ($14 884 vs. $12 353; P = 0.026). CONCLUSION: Patients who initiated DAPA or SITA had similar all-cause and diabetes-related healthcare costs over 1 year of follow-up. In the subgroup of patients treated with OAD monotherapy at baseline (84% metformin monotherapy), those who initiated DAPA as add-on therapy had lower costs than patients who added SITA.

Impact of opioid-induced constipation on healthcare resource utilization and costs for cancer pain patients receiving continuous opioid therapy.

PURPOSE: Opioid therapy is often associated with adverse effects, including opioid-induced constipation (OIC), in patients receiving opioids for cancer pain. This retrospective observational cohort study evaluated healthcare utilization and costs during the first year after initiating opioid therapy among cancer patients with (cohort 1) and without (cohort 2) constipation. METHODS: This study used administrative claims data from the HealthCore Integrated Research Environment between January 1, 2006, and April 30, 2014. Eligible patients included adults ≥ 18 years with a diagnosis of cancer who initiated continuous opioid therapy (≥ 30 days). Propensity scores were used to match patients with constipation in a 1:1 ratio to those without constipation. Generalized linear models were used to evaluate healthcare utilization and costs during the 12 months after initiating opioid therapy. RESULTS: After matching, 1369 patients were included in each cohort. Patients with constipation were more than twice as likely as those without constipation to have an all-cause inpatient hospitalization (odds ratio [95% confidence interval (CI)], 2.47 [2.11-2.90]), or pain-related hospitalization (2.15 [1.82-2.54]) during the 12 months after initiating therapy. Mean unadjusted overall healthcare costs during the first 12 months post-index were $21,629 (95% CI, $14,850-$29,018) higher for patients with constipation than for those without constipation. For patients with constipation, total mean (SD) constipation-related costs were $9196 ($26,896). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that OIC is associated with significantly increased healthcare and economic burden in cancer pain patients and that early and ongoing recognition and management of OIC are unmet needs in this population.

Resource use and costs associated with opioid-induced constipation following total hip or total knee replacement surgery.

PURPOSE: Constipation is a well-known complication of surgery that can be exacerbated by opioid analgesics. This study evaluated resource utilization and costs associated with opioid-induced constipation (OIC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective, observational, and propensity-matched cohort study utilized the Premier Healthcare Database. The study included adults ≥18 years of age undergoing total hip or total knee replacement as inpatients who received an opioid analgesic and were discharged between January 1, 2012, and June 30, 2015. Diagnosis codes identified patients with OIC who were then matched 1:1 to patients without OIC. Generalized linear and logistic regression models were used to compare inpatient resource utilization, total hospital costs, inpatient mortality, and 30-day all-cause readmissions and emergency department visits. RESULTS: Of 788,448 eligible patients, 40,891 (5.2%) had OIC. Covariates were well balanced between matched patients with and without OIC (n=40,890 each). In adjusted analyses, patients with OIC had longer hospital lengths of stay (3.6 versus 3.3 days; p<0.001), higher total hospital costs (US$17,479 versus US$16,265; p<0.001), greater risk of intensive care unit admission (odds ratio [OR]=1.12, 95% CI: 1.01-1.24), and increased likelihood of 30-day hospital read-missions (OR=1.16, 95% CI: 1.11-1.22) and emergency department visits (OR=1.38, 95% CI: 1.07-1.79) than patients without OIC. No statistically significant difference was found with inpatient mortality (OR=0.89, 95% CI: 0.59-1.35). CONCLUSION: OIC was associated with greater resource utilization and hospital costs for patients undergoing primarily elective total hip or total knee replacement surgery. These results support OIC screening and management strategies as part of perioperative care management.

Rates of myocardial infarction and stroke in patients initiating treatment with SGLT2-inhibitors versus other glucose-lowering agents in real-world clinical practice: Results from the CVD-REAL study.

The multinational, observational CVD-REAL study recently showed that initiation of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) was associated with significantly lower rates of death and heart failure vs other glucose-lowering drugs (oGLDs). This sub-analysis of the CVD-REAL study sought to determine the association between initiation of SGLT-2i vs oGLDs and rates of myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke. Medical records, claims and national registers from the USA, Sweden, Norway and Denmark were used to identify patients with T2D who newly initiated treatment with SGLT-2i (canagliflozin, dapagliflozin or empagliflozin) or oGLDs. A non-parsimonious propensity score was developed within each country to predict initiation of SGLT-2i, and patients were matched 1:1 in the treatment groups. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were generated using Cox regression models. Overall, 205 160 patients were included. In the intent-to-treat analysis, over 188 551 and 188 678 person-years of follow-up (MI and stroke, respectively), there were 1077 MI and 968 stroke events. Initiation of SGLT-2i vs oGLD was associated with a modestly lower risk of MI and stroke (MI: HR, 0.85; 95%CI, 0.72-1.00; P = .05; Stroke: HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.71-0.97; P = .02). These findings complement the results of the cardiovascular outcomes trials, and offer additional reassurance with regard to the cardiovascular effects of SGLT-2i, specifically as it relates to ischaemic events.

All-cause and diabetes-related healthcare costs among US adults with type 2 diabetes initiating exenatide once weekly or insulin glargine.

AIMS: To compare healthcare utilization and costs between patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with exenatide (Bydureon) once weekly (EQW) and patients treated with insulin glargine (IG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental databases, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult US patients with claim with a diagnosis of T2D, initiating EQW or IG from February 1, 2012 to June 30, 2014 (first claim = index date). All-cause and diabetes-related utilization and costs were measured during the 12 months after the index date. EQW patients were matched 1:1 to IG patients, using propensity scores. Logistic and ordinary least-squares regression models were fit to model differences between the matched cohorts. RESULTS: There were 7749 EQW patients matched to 7749 IG patients. EQW patients had significantly (P < .05) lower odds of all-cause inpatient (IP) admissions (odds ratio = 0.737 [95% confidence interval, 0.661, 0.822]), diabetes-related IP admissions (0.720 [95% confidence interval, 0.635, 0.815]) and diabetes-related IP admissions or emergency room visits (0.778 [95% confidence interval, 0.713, 0.847]). EQW patients had significantly (P < .05) lower all-cause (cost difference = -113 USD [95% confidence interval, -120 USD, -106 USD]) and diabetes-related (-806 USD [95% confidence interval, -871 USD, -746 USD]) medical costs, and had significantly (P < .05) higher all-cause total costs (ie, medical plus pharmacy) (3228 USD [95% confidence interval, 3110 USD, 3367 USD]), diabetes-related total costs (1951 USD [95% confidence interval, 1873 USD, 2036 USD]), all-cause pharmacy costs (2792 USD [95% confidence interval, 2700 USD, 2928 USD]) and diabetes-related pharmacy costs (1923 USD [95% confidence interval, 1890 USD, 1957 USD]) than those of IG patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among adults with T2D, EQW initiators had lower odds of IP admission and lower medical costs in the 12 months after initiation than IG initiators. Higher total costs in EQW patients were driven by greater pharmacy costs.

Rationale and design of the ENhancing outcomes through Goal Assessment and Generating Engagement in Diabetes Mellitus (ENGAGE-DM) pragmatic trial.

BACKGROUND: Poor glycemic control among patients with diabetes may stem from poor medication and lifestyle adherence or a failure to appropriately intensify therapy. A patient-centered approach could discern the most likely possibility and would then, as appropriate, address patient barriers to non-adherence (using behavioral interviewing methods such as motivational interviewing) or help facilitate choices among treatment augmentation options (using methods such as shared decision-making). OBJECTIVE: To test the impact of a novel telephone-based patient-centered intervention on glycemic control for patients with poorly-controlled diabetes. METHODS/DESIGN: ENGAGE-DM (ENhancing outcomes through Goal Assessment and Generating Engagement in Diabetes Mellitus) is a pragmatic trial of patients with poorly-controlled diabetes receiving treatment with an oral hypoglycemic agent. We randomized 1400 patients in a large health insurer to intervention or usual care. The intervention is delivered over the telephone by a pharmacist and consists of a 2-step process that integrates brief negotiated interviewing and shared decision-making to identify patient-concordant goals and options for enhancing patients' diabetes management. The trial's primary outcome is disease control, assessed using glycosylated hemoglobin values. Secondary outcomes include medication adherence measures, assessed using pharmacy claims data. CONCLUSIONS: This trial will determine whether a novel highly-scalable patient engagement strategy improves disease control and adherence to medications among individuals with poorly-controlled diabetes.

Cost Comparison of Urate-Lowering Therapies in Patients with Gout and Moderate-to-Severe Chronic Kidney Disease.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at increased risk for developing gout and having refractory disease. Gout flare prevention relies heavily on urate-lowering therapies such as allopurinol and febuxostat, but clinical decision making in patients with moderate-to-severe CKD is complicated by significant comorbidity and the scarcity of real-world cost-effectiveness studies. OBJECTIVE: To compare total and disease-specific health care expenditures by line of therapy in allopurinol and febuxostat initiators after diagnosis with gout and moderate-to-severe CKD. METHODS: A retrospective observational cohort study was conducted to compare mean monthly health care cost (in 2012 U.S. dollars) among gout patients with CKD (stage 3 or 4) who initiated allopurinol or febuxostat. The primary outcome was total mean monthly health care expenditures, and the secondary outcome was disease-specific (gout, diabetes, renal, and cardiovascular disease [CVD]) expenditures. Gout patients (ICD-9-CM 274.xx) aged ≥ 18 years with concurrent CKD (stage 3 or 4) were selected from the MarketScan databases (January 2009-June 2012) upon allopurinol or febuxostat initiation. Patients were followed until disenrollment, discontinuation of the qualifying study agent, or use of the alternate study agent. Patients initiating allopurinol were subsequently propensity score-matched (1:1) to patients initiating febuxostat. Five generalized linear models (GLMs) were developed, each controlling for propensity score, to identify the incremental costs (vs. allopurinol) associated with febuxostat initiation in first-line (without prior allopurinol exposure) and second-line (with prior allopurinol exposure) settings. RESULTS: Propensity score matching yielded 2 cohorts, each with 1,486 patients (64.6% male, mean [SD] age 67.4 [12.8] years). Post-match, 74.6% of patients had stage 3 CKD; 82.9% had CVD; and 42.1% had diabetes. The post-match sample was well balanced on numerous comorbidities and medication exposures with the following exception: 50.0% of febuxostat initiators were treated in the second-line setting; that is, they had baseline exposure to allopurinol, whereas only 4.2% of allopurinol initiators had baseline exposure to febuxostat. Unadjusted mean monthly cost was $1,490 allopurinol and $1,525 febuxostat (P = 0.809). GLM results suggest that first-line febuxostat users incurred significantly (P = 0.009) lower cost than allopurinol users ($1,299 vs. $1,487), whereas second-line febuxostat initiators incurred significantly (P = 0.001) higher cost ($1,751 vs. $1,487). Febuxostat initiators in both settings had significantly (P < 0.001) higher gout-specific cost, due to higher febuxostat acquisition cost. Increased gout-specific cost in the first-line febuxostat cohort was offset by significantly (P < 0.001) lower CVD ($288 vs. $459) and renal-related cost ($86 vs. $216). There were no significant differences in either renal or CVD costs (adjusted) between allopurinol initiators treated almost exclusively in the first-line setting and second-line febuxostat patients. CONCLUSIONS: Gout patients with concurrent CKD, initiating treatment with febuxostat in a first-line setting, incurred significantly less total cost than patients initiating allopurinol during the first exposure to each agent. Conversely, patients treated with second-line febuxostat following allopurinol incurred significantly higher total cost than patients initiating allopurinol. There was no significant difference in total cost between the agents across line of therapy. Although study findings suggest the potential for CVD and renal-related savings to offset febuxostat's higher acquisition cost in gout patients with moderate-to-severe CKD, this is the first such retrospective evaluation. Future research is warranted to both demonstrate the durability of study findings and to better elucidate the mechanism by which associated cost offsets occur. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study. Turpin is an employee of Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A. Mitri and Wittbrodt were employees of Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A. at the time of this study. Tidwell and Schulman are employees of Outcomes Research Solutions, consultants to Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A. All authors contributed to the design of the study and to the writing and review of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Tidwell and Schulman collected the data, and all authors participated in data interpretation.

The Challenges and Opportunities Associated with Reimbursement for Obesity Pharmacotherapy in the USA.

Obesity has become a serious public health problem that has stimulated primordial and primary prevention efforts, and a triad of management options (lifestyle, pharmacotherapy, and surgical interventions). A growing body of evidence supports the need for a multi-pronged, clinic-based approach that leverages the synergy between pharmaceutical and lifestyle modification. Recent US policy changes-namely, the passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act coupled with recognition of obesity as a disease by the American Medical Association-suggest that financial incentives and attitudes towards obesity management are changing. This paradigm shift has implications for current and future obesity pharmacotherapy. However, barriers to pharmacotherapy utilization include patient and physician perceptions of modest efficacy, historical safety issues, regulatory obstacles, and lack of reimbursement. The shifting attitudes and challenges associated not only with a multi-payer system, but also the lack of clearly defined cross-payer reimbursement strategies, prompted a survey to determine coverage for obesity treatment. Participants indicated that federal/state mandates and growth of quality-driven healthcare initiatives will eventually drive wider pharmacotherapy reimbursement within 1-5 years. There are signs that federal/state programs are already moving towards reimbursement by improving quality measures to track obesity outcomes and reduce costs. Future research on clinical and economic outcomes of combination weight-management programs coupled with innovative approaches (e.g., eHealth) in the real-world setting that demonstrate value to patients, healthcare providers, payers, and employers will help reshape obesity management by reducing barriers and broadening reimbursement coverage for anti-obesity pharmacotherapy.