Erratum: Author Correction: Surgical Treatment Patterns, Healthcare Resource Utilization, and Economic Burden in Patients with Tenosynovial Giant Cell Tumor Who Underwent Joint Surgery in the United States.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.36469/jheor.2022.32485.].

Chronic Myeloid Leukemia: Part I-Real-World Treatment Patterns, Healthcare Resource Utilization, and Associated Costs in Later Lines of Therapy in the United States.

Background: Despite advances in tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy for chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP), a sizeable proportion of patients with CML-CP remains refractory or intolerant to these agents. Objectives: Treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization (HRU), and costs were evaluated among patients with CML who received third or later lines of therapy (3L+), a clinical population that has not been previously well-studied, with unmet treatment needs as TKI therapy has repeatedly failed. Methods: Adult patients with CML who received 3L+ were identified in the IBM® MarketScan® Databases (January 1, 2001-June 30, 2019) and the SEER-Medicare-linked database (January 1, 2006-December 31, 2016). Treatment patterns were observed from CML diagnosis. HRU and direct healthcare costs (payer's perspective, 2019 USD) were measured in a 3L+ setting. Results: Among 296 commercially insured patients with 3L+ (median age, 58.5 years; female, 49.7%), the median duration of first-line (1L), second-line (2L), and 3L therapy was 8.5, 4.2, and 8.3 months, respectively. The annual incidence rate during 3L+ was 3.4 for inpatient days, 30.8 for days with outpatient services, and 1.2 for emergency department visits. Mean per-patient-per-month (PPPM) total healthcare costs (pharmacy + medical costs) were $18 784 in 3L+, $15 206 in 3L, and $19 546 in 4L, with inpatient costs driving most of the difference between 3L and 4L (mean [3L] = $2528 PPPM, mean [4L] = $6847 PPPM). Among 53 Medicare-insured patients with 3L+ (median age, 72.0 years; female, 39.6%), the median duration of 1L, 2L, and 3L therapy was 9.7, 5.0, and 7.0 months, respectively. During 3L+, the annual incidence rate was 10.3 for inpatient days, 61.9 for days with outpatient services, and 1.5 for emergency department visits. Mean PPPM total healthcare costs were $14 311 in 3L+, $15 100 in 3L, and $16 062 in 4L. Discussion: Patients with CML receiving 3L+ rapidly cycled through multiple lines. Costs increased from 3L to 4L; in commercially insured patients, inpatient costs were responsible for most of the cost increase between 3L and 4L, underlying these patients' continued need for care. Conclusions: These findings support the need for better treatment options in patients with CML undergoing later lines of therapy.

The Economic Burden of Eosinophilic Gastritis and Eosinophilic Enteritis in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Eosinophilic gastritis and eosinophilic enteritis (EoG/EoN) are associated with a substantial clinical burden. However, limited information is available regarding the economic burden of EoG/EoN. This study was conducted to compare healthcare resource use (HRU) and costs among patients with EoG/EoN versus without EoG/EoN in the USA. METHODS: Administrative claims data from the IBM MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters (CCAE) and Medicare Supplemental and Coordination of Benefits Databases (2009-2019) was used to identify two cohorts of patients. Patients without EoG/EoN were matched 3:1 to patients with EoG/EoN on sex, year of birth, and healthcare plan type. Study measures included demographic characteristics, select comorbidities, all-cause HRU, and costs. Comparisons were made over a 1-year period following EoG/EoN diagnosis for patients with EoG/EoN and an eligible date for patients without EoG/EoN. RESULTS: A total of 2219 patients with EoG/EoN and 6657 patients without EoG/EoN were analyzed. Significantly higher proportions of patients with EoG/EoN versus without EoG/EoN had comorbid conditions. Rates of all-cause HRU were significantly higher among patients with EoG/EoN versus patients without EoG/EoN (adjusted rate ratio [95% confidence interval]: inpatient visits, 6.26 [5.26, 7.46]; outpatient visits, 1.17 [1.16, 1.19]; emergency department visits, 2.11 [1.98, 2.25]; all p < 0.001). Patients with EoG/EoN incurred significantly higher costs versus patients without EoG/EoN (adjusted mean cost difference $31,180; p < 0.001). Cost differences were largely due to outpatient (adjusted mean cost difference $14,018; p < 0.001) and inpatient (adjusted mean cost difference $11,224; p < 0.001) costs. CONCLUSION: The economic burden associated with EoG/EoN is substantial, with patients with EoG/EoN having a higher rate of HRU and incurring $31,180 more than patients without EoG/EoN on average. Most of the cost difference was attributable to outpatient and inpatient costs. Cost-saving strategies to lower the burden of illness in this patient population are needed.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of semaglutide 2.4 mg for the treatment of adult patients with overweight and obesity in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The rising prevalence and associated public health burden of obesity has led to advancements in pharmaceuticals for weight management. Semaglutide 2.4 mg, an anti-obesity medication (AOM) recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, has demonstrated clinically relevant weight loss in its phase 3 clinical trials. Economic evaluation comparing semaglutide 2.4 mg with other available weight management therapies is essential to inform payers for decision-making. OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of semaglutide 2.4 mg in the treatment of adult patients with obesity (ie, body mass index [BMI] ≥ 30) and adult patients who are overweight (ie, BMI 27-29.9) with 1 or more weight-related comorbidities from a US third-party payer perspective. METHODS: A cohort Markov model was constructed to compare semaglutide 2.4 mg with the following comparators: no treatment, diet and exercise (D&E), and 3 branded AOMs (liraglutide 3 mg, phentermine-topiramate, and naltrexone-bupropion). All AOMs, including semaglutide 2.4 mg, were assumed to be taken in conjunction with D&E. Changes in BMI, blood pressure, cholesterol level, experience of acute and chronic obesity-related complications, costs, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were simulated over 30 years based on pivotal trials of the AOMs and other relevant literature. Drug and health care prices reflect 2021 standardized values. Cost-effectiveness was examined with a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the cost-effectiveness results to plausible variation in model inputs. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, treatment with semaglutide 2.4 mg was estimated to improve QALYs by 0.138 to 0.925 and incur higher costs by $3,254 to $25,086 over the 30-year time horizon vs comparators. Semaglutide 2.4 mg is cost-effective against all comparators at the prespecified WTP threshold, with the incremental cost per QALY gained ranging from $23,556 to $144,296 per QALY gained. In the sensitivity analysis, extended maximum treatment duration, types of subsequent treatment following therapy discontinuation, and weight-rebound rates were identified as key drivers for model results. The estimated probability of semaglutide 2.4 mg being cost-effective compared with comparators ranged from 67% to 100% when varying model parameters and assumptions. CONCLUSIONS: As a long-term weight management therapy, semaglutide 2.4 mg was estimated to be cost-effective compared with no treatment, D&E alone, and all other branded AOM comparators under a WTP threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained over a 30-year time horizon. DISCLOSURES: Financial support for this research was provided by Novo Nordisk Inc. The study sponsor was involved in several aspects of the research, including the study design, the interpretation of data, the writing of the manuscript, and the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Dr Kim and Ms Ramasamy are employees of Novo Nordisk Inc. Ms Kumar and Dr Burudpakdee were employees of Novo Nordisk Inc at the time this study was conducted. Dr Sullivan received research support from Novo Nordisk Inc for this study. Drs Wang, Song, Wu, Ms Xie, and Ms Sun are employees of Analysis Group, Inc, who received consultancy fees from Novo Nordisk Inc in connection with this study.

Surgical Treatment Patterns, Healthcare Resource Utilization, and Economic Burden in Patients with Tenosynovial Giant Cell Tumor Who Underwent Joint Surgery in the United States.

Background: Tenosynovial giant cell tumors (TGCT) are rare and locally aggressive neoplasms in synovium, bursae, and tendon sheaths, which cause pain, joint dysfunction, and damage to the affected joints. Objective: To evaluate the surgical patterns and economic burden among patients with TGCT who underwent joint surgery in the United States. Methods: Patients newly diagnosed with TGCT, aged 18-64 years, who underwent joint surgery post-TGCT diagnosis were identified from the OptumHealth Care Solutions, Inc database (Q1/1999-Q1/2017). Patients were required to be continuously enrolled for ≥1 year before and ≥3 years after the first TGCT diagnosis (index date). Surgical patterns were assessed post-index. Healthcare resource utilization and associated healthcare costs, and indirect costs related to work loss in year 1, year 2, and year 3 post-index, were compared with those at baseline. Results: Of 835 eligible TGCT patients, 462 (55%) patients who had ≥1 joint surgery post-index were included. During a median follow-up of 5.7 years, 78% of patients underwent their first joint surgery in year 1 and 41% had ≥1 repeat surgery. Magnetic resonance imaging utilization was highest during baseline (46%) and declined afterward (28%, 17%, and 19% in years 1, 2, and 3, respectively). Opioids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and physical therapy, occupational therapy, and rehabilitation services, were commonly used during baseline (45%, 40%, and 30%, respectively). More patients used opioids in year 1 vs baseline (78% vs 45%; P<0.0001), while its utilization return to baseline levels in year 2 (41%) and year 3 (42%). A similar pattern was observed for NSAIDs and physical/occupational therapy/rehabilitation services. Healthcare resource utilization and associated healthcare costs surged in year 1 and returned to baseline or lower in years 2 and 3. A similar pattern was observed for indirect costs associated with work loss. Discussion: The high proportion of patients undergoing repeat surgeries and prevalent use of opioids, NSAIDs, and physical/occupational therapy/rehabilitation services suggests an unmet medical need after surgical treatment. Conclusions: Surgical resection alone might be inadequate to control TGCT. New treatment options may complement surgery and alleviate the clinical and economic burden experienced by patients with TGCT who had received prior surgery.

Hemophilia Gene Therapy Value Assessment: Methodological Challenges and Recommendations.

Gene therapy for hemophilia is designed to produce health gains for patients over many years. Rewarding that value creation on the basis of a one-time treatment implies a large upfront cost. This cost can only be justified by long-term health benefits and being cost-effective compared with conventional treatments. Yet, uncertainties about the long-term benefits make it challenging to assess clinical and economic value of gene therapies at launch. We identify and discuss key methodological challenges in assessing the value of gene therapy for hemophilia, including the immaturity of evidence on the durability of benefits, lack of definition and valuation of cure for chronic diseases, absence of randomized controlled trials, limitations of traditional quality of life measures in hemophilia, approach for qualifying cost-savings compared with current treatments, and choice of perspective. The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review has developed a framework for assessing single or short-term therapies (ICER-SST) and has applied it in hemophilia. After reviewing this framework and its application, we recommend the following when assessing the value of hemophilia gene therapies: (1) leveraging expert clinical opinion to justify assumptions on the durability of benefits; (2) using external synthetic controls and lead-in, self-controlled trials to assess comparative effectiveness; (3) addressing limitations of traditional quality of life measures through the use of modified utility collection approaches; (4) adjusting cost offsets from gene therapies with caution; (5) considering outcome-based contracting to address uncertainties about prices and long-term outcomes; and (6) presenting societal and healthcare system perspectives in parallel.

Cost Effectiveness Analysis of Tisagenlecleucel for the Treatment of Adult Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma in Japan.

There are limited treatment options and substantial unmet needs for adult patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma (r/r DLBCL) in Japan. In 2019, tisagenlecleucel, a CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy, was approved for r/r DLBCL in Japan. The efficacy and safety of tisagenlecleucel were demonstrated in the pivotal phase II single-arm JULIET trial. The objective of the current study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of tisagenlecleucel treatment strategy versus current standard of care (salvage chemotherapy treatment strategy) for the treatment of patients with r/r DLBCL in Japan. A three-state partitioned survival model was constructed from a Japanese public healthcare payer's perspective, with the following three health states: progression-free survival, progressive/relapsed disease, and death. Because the tisagenlecleucel arm included patients who did or did not receive the infusion, a decision-tree structure was used to partition patients based on their infusion status. Treatment efficacy and costs were based on tisagenlecleucel-infused patients for those who received the infusion; for non-infused patients, they were based on standard salvage chemotherapy. The efficacy inputs for tisagenlecleucel-infused patients and salvage chemotherapy were based on observed data in the JULIET trial and the international SCHOLAR-1 meta-analysis, respectively, before year 3. Afterward, all patients were assumed to have no further progression and to incur the mortality risk of long-term DLBCL survivors. The base case analysis explored a lifetime horizon (44 years), with costs and effectiveness discounted 2.0% annually, and it used a monthly model cycle. Direct costs were considered in the base case, composed of pretreatment costs, treatment costs, adverse events management costs, follow-up costs before progression, subsequent SCT costs, post-progression costs, and terminal care costs. Total incremental costs, life years (LYs), and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were compared for tisagenlecleucel versus salvage chemotherapy. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated as the costs per QALY gained, and a threshold of ¥7.5 million was used to assess whether tisagenlecleucel is cost effective. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. The total LYs (discounted) for tisagenlecleucel and salvage chemotherapy were 7.24 and 4.35 years, respectively; the corresponding QALYs were 5.42 and 2.57 years, respectively. The discounted incremental LYs and QALYs comparing tisagenlecleucel to salvage chemotherapy were estimated as 2.89 and 2.85 years, respectively. Over a lifetime horizon, the model estimated that tisagenlecleucel had a total incremental cost of ¥15,590,335 (discounted) versus salvage chemotherapy. Tisagenlecleucel was associated with an ICER of ¥5,476,496 per QALY gained compared to salvage chemotherapy. Extensive sensitivity analyses supported the base-case findings. Tisagenlecleucel is a cost-effective treatment strategy for r/r DLBCL compared to salvage chemotherapy treatment strategy from a Japanese public healthcare payer's perspective.

Health care resource utilization and cost burden of hemophilia B in the United States.

Hemophilia B is a rare congenital blood disorder characterized by factor IX deficiency. Clinical profiles of hemophilia B range from mild to severe forms of the disease. The objective of this study was to characterize the economic burden associated with differing clinical profiles of hemophilia B from a US health system perspective. Using the IBM MarketScan database (June 2011-February 2019), a claims-based algorithm was developed to identify 4 distinct profiles (mild, moderate, moderate-severe, and severe) in adult males with hemophilia B based on the frequency of hemorrhage events and factor IX replacement claims. Mean annual health care resource use (HRU) and costs were statistically compared between patients with hemophilia B (N = 454) and 1:1 demographic-matched controls (N = 454), both overall and with stratification by clinical profile. Compared with matched controls, patients with hemophilia B had a significantly higher comorbidity burden (Charlson Comorbidity Index, mean ± standard deviation [SD]: 0.9 ± 1.7 vs 0.3 ± 0.9, P < .001). Across all clinical profiles, patients with hemophilia B had significantly higher HRU vs matched controls (mean ± SD: 0.3 ± 0.6 vs 0.1 ± 0.3 inpatient admissions; 0.6 ± 1.2 vs 0.2 ± 0.6 emergency department visits; 17.7 ± 22.9 vs 8.0 ± 11.0 outpatient visits; all P < .001). Annual total health care costs per patient among patients with hemophilia B were more than 25-fold higher vs matched controls (mean ± SD: $201 635 ± $411 530 vs $7879 ± $29 040, respectively, P < .001). Annual total health care costs per patient increased with increasing severity (mean ± SD: mild, $80 811 ± $284 313; moderate, $137 455 ± $222 021; moderate-severe, $251 619 ± $576 886; severe, $632 088 ± $501 270). The findings of this study highlight the substantial burden of illness associated with hemophilia B.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Tisagenlecleucel for the Treatment of Pediatric and Young Adult Patients with Relapsed or Refractory B Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia in Japan.

Until recently, treatment options were relatively limited for children and young adults with relapsed or refractory (r/r) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Tisagenlecleucel is a chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T) immunotherapy with promising efficacy and manageable safety that was approved in Japan in 2019 for the treatment of CD19-positive r/r B cell ALL (B-ALL). However, there is no publication assessing the cost-effectiveness of CAR-T in Japan. The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of a tisagenlecleucel treatment strategy compared to a blinatumomab treatment strategy and a clofarabine combination treatment strategy (i.e., clofarabine + cyclophosphamide + etoposide) in Japan for pediatric and young adult patients up to 25 years of age with r/r B-ALL. A partitioned survival model with a lifetime horizon and monthly cycle was constructed from a Japanese public healthcare payer's perspective. Patients were distributed across the following partitioned health states: event-free survival (EFS), progressive disease, and death, which were informed by the EFS and overall survival (OS) data of respective clinical trials before year 5. For the tisagenlecleucel arm, a decision-tree structure was used to partition patients based on the infusion status; those who discontinued prior to receiving infusion were assigned efficacy and cost inputs of blinatumomab and those who received infusion were assigned efficacy and costs inputs based on tisagenlecleucel-infused patients. As trial data for blinatumomab and clofarabine ended before year 5, matching-adjusted indirect comparisons were used to extrapolate OS between the end of trial observation and up to year 5. All surviving patients followed the mortality risk of long-term ALL survivors without additional risk of disease relapse after year 5, regardless of initial treatment strategies. The model accounted for pretreatment costs, treatment costs, adverse event costs, follow-up costs, subsequent allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation costs, and terminal care costs. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) per life-years (LYs) gained and ICERs per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained were evaluated using a 2% discount rate, and a threshold of ¥7.5 million was used to assess cost-effectiveness. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. The total LYs (discounted) for tisagenlecleucel, blinatumomab, and clofarabine combination treatment strategies were 13.3, 4.0, and 2.7 years, respectively; the corresponding QALYs were 11.6, 3.1, and 2.1 years, respectively. The ICERs per QALY gained for tisagenlecleucel were ¥2,035,071 versus blinatumomab and ¥2,644,702 versus clofarabine combination therapy. Extensive sensitivity analyses supported the findings. Tisagenlecleucel is a cost-effective treatment strategy for pediatric and young adult patients with r/r B-ALL from a Japanese public healthcare payer's perspective.

The Economic Burden of Tenosynovial Giant Cell Tumors Among Employed Workforce in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the economic burden of tenosynovial giant cell tumor (TGCT) among US employed workforce. METHODS: Patients with TGCT medical claims (N = 1395) and matched controls (1:10) without TGCT claims (N = 13,950) were identified from the OptumHealth Care Solutions, Inc. database (January 1, 1999 to March 31, 2017). Adjusted regression models were used to compare healthcare resource utilization, time lost from work, and associated costs between cohorts. RESULTS: In patients with TGCT, the rates of inpatient admissions, emergency room visits, outpatient visits, and work loss days were 2.8, 1.5, 2.2, and 2.6 times those of matched controls, respectively (all P < 0.001). Total annual all-cause healthcare costs and work loss-related costs were $9368 and $2708 higher for TGCT patients than for matched controls, respectively (all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: TGCT was associated with a significant healthcare and work loss burden on US employers.

Treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes treated with hypomethylating agents: a SEER-Medicare analysis.

To describe real-world treatment patterns and outcomes among adult patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) treated with hypomethylating agents (HMA), patients were identified in the SEER-Medicare database (01/2006-12/2016); 3,046 patients with MDS treated with HMA were included. An algorithm was developed to categorize patients into MDS risk groups: the majority of patients were classified as Higher-risk (70.9%), 8.0% as Intermediate-risk, and 21.1% as Unknown-risk. Overall, 77.4% of patients initiated azacitidine and 22.6% decitabine; they received an average of 5.1 index-HMA cycles, of which 90.9% were complete with a median cycle duration of 28 days. Median survival was 11.6, 18.4, and 19.1 months for the Higher-risk, Intermediate-risk, and Unknown-risk groups, respectively. Median time-to-AML transformation was 19.3 months for the Higher-risk group and 50.4 months for the Intermediate-risk group (not reached for Unknown-risk). Data highlight the unmet medical needs of patients with MDS treated with HMA, particularly for the Higher-risk MDS group.

Healthcare resource utilization and costs in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes treated with hypomethylating agents: a SEER-Medicare analysis.

AIMS: To describe healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) treated with hypomethylating agents (HMA) based on HMA-treatment response. MATERIALS AND METHODS: SEER-Medicare data (January 2006-December 2016) were used to identify adults diagnosed with MDS (SEER: January 2009-December 2015) initiated on HMA (index date). HMA-treatment success (indicators: ≥7 HMA cycles, stem cell transplantation, and transfusion independence) or failure (indicators: acute myeloid leukemia [AML], AML-like treatment, and death) was determined using a claim-based algorithm. HRU and costs were assessed from the index date to 1-year post-index, overall and stratified by HMA-treatment success or failure. Among patients with HMA-treatment failure, HRU and costs were also assessed from failure to 1-year post-failure. RESULTS: The study included 3,046 patients (mean age: 77.4 years; females: 36.8%). Rates of HMA-treatment success and failure were 44.4% and 76.2%, respectively (20.6% had HMA-treatment success then failure). Overall, patients had 15.2 inpatient admissions per-100-patients-per-month (median follow-up: 5.9 months). Patients with HMA-treatment success had 7.5 inpatient admissions per-100-patients-per-month (median follow-up: 12.0 months), while those with HMA-treatment failure had 20.4 and 35.3 admissions per-100-patients-per-month pre- and post-HMA-treatment failure, respectively (median follow-up: 4.3 and 1.8 months, pre- and post-HMA-treatment failure, respectively). Mean total healthcare costs were $12,494 per-patient-per-month overall, $8,069 per-patient-per-month among patients with HMA-treatment success, and $13,809 and $19,242 per-patient-per-month pre- and post-HMA-treatment failure, respectively. Outpatient costs (68.3%) were the main contributor of total healthcare costs overall, while inpatient costs (80.3%) were the main cost driver post-HMA-treatment failure. LIMITATIONS: Without available laboratory test results, clinical indicators observed in claims were used to assess HMA-treatment response. CONCLUSIONS: Over 75% of patients with MDS failed HMA-treatment within 6 months of initiation and were observed with more inpatient admissions than those with HMA-treatment success, translating into substantially higher healthcare costs. HMA-treatment failure results in an important economic burden in MDS patients.

Postdischarge Health Care Costs and Readmission in Patients With Hyperkalemia-Related Hospitalizations.

INTRODUCTION: Limited evidence is available regarding the postdischarge economic and readmission burdens of hyperkalemia. METHODS: Using the IBM MarketScan Commercial and Medicare-Supplemental Claims database (January 1, 2010-December 31, 2014), adult patients with a hospitalization with a hyperkalemia diagnosis (ICD-9-CM 276.7, hyperkalemia cohort) were 1:1 matched with patients with a hospitalization without evidence of hyperkalemia (nonhyperkalemia cohort) on age, chronic kidney disease stage, heart failure, dialysis, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitor use, and major diagnostic categories of the hospitalization. All-cause health care costs and health care resource utilization measures were compared between cohorts during the 1-year postdischarge period. Postdischarge readmission and length of stay (LOS) were compared between hyperkalemia-related hospitalizations from the hyperkalemia cohort and matched hospitalizations unrelated to hyperkalemia from the nonhyperkalemia cohort. RESULTS: Patients with hyperkalemia-related hospitalizations (n = 4426) incurred $30,379 (95% confidence interval, $25,423-$35,335) higher 1-year total all-cause costs ($68,861 vs. $38,482) and had higher rates of inpatient admissions (1.0 vs. 0.4), emergency department visits (2.0 vs. 1.2), and outpatient visits (49.6 vs. 39.1) than the nonhyperkalemia cohort during the 1-year postdischarge study period (all P < 0.001). Hyperkalemia-related hospitalizations (n = 5377) were associated with significantly higher readmission rates (within 30 days: 0.15 vs. 0.09; 60 days: 0.25 vs. 0.16; 90 days: 0.36 vs. 0.23; all P < 0.001), longer LOS per readmission (8.1 vs. 7.1 days), and longer total inpatient days (10.5 vs. 5.8 days) compared with hospitalizations unrelated to hyperkalemia (all P < 0.001). Similar trends were observed across comorbidity subgroups. CONCLUSION: Hyperkalemia-related hospitalizations were associated with significant economic and readmission burdens during the 1-year postdischarge period.

Estimation of Total Costs in Pediatric and Young Adult Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Receiving Tisagenlecleucel from a U.S. Hospital's Perspective.

BACKGROUND: Tisagenlecleucel was approved for the treatment of pediatric and young adult patients with relapsed/refractory (r/r) B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) based on the pivotal ELIANA trial. OBJECTIVE: To comprehensively evaluate the total costs associated with tisagenlecleucel treatment, including costs from pre- to postinfusion periods of tisagenlecleucel in addition to the cost of tisagenlecleucel. METHODS: An economic model was developed to estimate total costs associated with tisagenlecleucel treatment from the time of leukapheresis to 2 months postinfusion from a U.S. hospital's perspective. Costs were estimated based on resource use and safety management from the ELIANA trial and were considered during the pretreatment, tisagenlecleucel infusion, and follow-up periods of treatment. Cost components included leukapheresis, lymphodepleting chemotherapy, tisagenlecleucel infusion and hospital administration, inpatient and intensive care unit admissions, medical professional visits, laboratory tests and procedures, and management of major adverse events. Scenario analyses were conducted by varying key assumptions related to adverse events and hospitalization. RESULTS: The total cost associated with tisagenlecleucel treatment among pediatric and young adult patients with r/r ALL was estimated to be $612,779, of which $137,636 (22.5%) was in addition to the list price of tisagenlecleucel ($475,000) and the associated administration cost of $143.08. The top 3 drivers of the additional cost were adverse event management ($70,968; 51.6%), inpatient and intensive care unit admissions not attributed to adverse events ($57,952; 42.1%), and laboratory tests and procedures ($5,209; 3.8%). The costs incurred during the pretreatment, infusion, and follow-up periods were $29,002, $476,659, and $107,118, respectively. In the scenario analyses, the total costs ranged from $483,169 (tisagenlecleucel treatment in the outpatient setting without adverse events) to $672,373 (tisagenlecleucel treatment in the inpatient setting with grade 3/4 cytokine release syndrome and B-cell aplasia). CONCLUSIONS: In this economic model, tisagenlecleucel treatment among pediatric and young adult patients with r/r ALL was estimated to cost $612,779. The cost of care in addition to the price of tisagenlecleucel accounted for 22.5% of the total, with adverse event management and inpatient and intensive care unit admissions being main drivers. Further studies are warranted to assess the cost of tisagenlecleucel treatment in the context of current standards of care in real-world clinical practice. DISCLOSURES: This study was supported by Novartis. The study sponsor was involved in several aspects of the research, including the study design, the interpretation of data, the writing of the manuscript, and the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Hao is an employee of Novartis and has stock/stock options. Yang, Chai, Qi, and Wu are employees of Analysis Group, which received consulting fees from Novartis for work on this study. Part of the material in this manuscript was presented at the American Society of Hematology Annual Meeting held December 7-10, 2019, in Orlando, FL.

Estimation of total costs in patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma receiving tisagenlecleucel from a US hospital's perspective.

Aims: This study estimated the total costs associated with tisagenlecleucel treatment in adult patients with relapsed/refractory (r/r) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) based on the JULIET trial from a United States hospital's perspective.Methods: An economic model was developed to assess the total costs associated with tisagenlecleucel treatment (from leukapheresis to two months post-infusion) in adults (aged ≥18 years) with r/r DLBCL using a fee-for-service approach. Costs were considered during the pre-treatment, tisagenlecleucel infusion, and follow-up periods, and were estimated based on the health resource utilization and safety data from the JULIET trial. Cost components included leukapheresis, lymphodepleting chemotherapy, tisagenlecleucel infusion/administration, inpatient and intensive care unit (ICU) admission, medical professional visits, lab tests/procedures, and management of adverse events (AEs). The base-case model estimated the total costs using observed hospitalization, ICU, and AE data from JULIET, while scenario analyses varied key assumptions related to AEs and hospitalization.Results: The estimated overall cost associated with tisagenlecleucel treatment from leukapheresis to two months post-infusion was $437,927/patient, of which $64,784 (14.8%) was additional to tisagenlecleucel's list price ($373,000) and the associated administration cost ($143). The top three key drivers of the additional cost were AE management ($30,594; 47.2%), inpatient/ICU not attributed to AEs ($24,285; 37.5%), and lab tests/procedures ($5,443; 8.4%). In the scenario analyses, total costs ranged from $382,702 (no AEs, no hospitalization) to $469,006 (cytokine release syndrome and B-cell aplasia, hospitalization).Limitations: This analysis was limited to two months of follow-up after tisagenlecleucel infusion, which cannot capture long-term safety outcomes associated with the treatment and may underestimate AE costs.Conclusions: The total cost of tisagenlecleucel administration from leukapheresis to two months was estimated at $437,927. In addition to tisagenlecleucel's price, the main drivers were AE management costs and inpatient/ICU costs. Future studies based on real-world, long-term use of tisagenlecleucel are warranted.

Prevalence and economic burden of hyperkalemia in the United States Medicare population.

Objective: To estimate the prevalence and economic burden of hyperkalemia in the United States (US) Medicare population.Methods: Patients were selected from a 5% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries (01 January 2010-31 December 2014) to estimate the prevalence and economic burden of hyperkalemia. The prevalence for each calendar year was calculated as the number of patients with hyperkalemia divided by the total number of eligible patients per year. To estimate the economic burden of hyperkalemia, patients with hyperkalemia (cases) were matched 1:1 to patients without hyperkalemia (controls) on age group, chronic kidney disease [CKD] stage, dialysis treatment, and heart failure. The incremental 30-day and 1-year resource utilization and costs (2016 USD) associated with hyperkalemia were estimated.Results: The estimated prevalence of hyperkalemia was 2.6-2.7% in the overall population and 8.9-9.3% among patients with CKD and/or heart failure. Patients with hyperkalemia had higher 1-year rates of inpatient admissions (1.28 vs. 0.44), outpatient visits (30.48 vs. 23.88), emergency department visits (2.01 vs. 1.17), and skilled nursing facility admissions (0.36 vs. 0.11) than the matched controls (all p < .001). Patients with hyperkalemia incurred on average $7208 higher 30-day costs ($8894 vs. $1685) and $19,348 higher 1-year costs ($34,362 vs. $15,013) than controls (both p < .001). Among patients with CKD and/or heart failure, the 30-day and 1-year total cost differences between cohorts were $7726 ($9906 vs. $2180) and $21,577 ($41,416 vs. $19,839), respectively (both p < .001).Conclusions: Hyperkalemia had an estimated prevalence of 2.6-2.7% in the Medicare population and was associated with markedly high healthcare costs.

The Development of Health Technology Assessment in Asia: Current Status and Future Trends.

Health technology assessment (HTA) has long been employed by many countries around the world, but its adoption in Asia has been slower. Only recently have a growing number of Asian countries started to implement HTA for pricing and reimbursement decisions. The objective of this article is to provide an overview of how HTA has been or is being implemented in Asia within the context of a country's existing-and often complex-coverage, reimbursement, and pricing schemes. Three countries at different stages of HTA implementation were selected as case studies: South Korea, where there is a young yet established HTA program; Japan, where a 3-year HTA pilot program has just concluded; and China, where HTA efforts are underway but have not been formally implemented. Not only do the experiences of these 3 countries well exemplify how the organization and scope of HTA can be customized to meet a country's unique healthcare needs, but they also provide the opportunity to outline some common key challenges that must be overcome to implement and develop HTA competencies and capabilities.

Transparency in Health Economic Modeling: Options, Issues and Potential Solutions.

Economic models are increasingly being used by health economists to assess the value of health technologies and inform healthcare decision making. However, most published economic models represent a kind of black box, with known inputs and outputs but undisclosed internal calculations and assumptions. This lack of transparency makes the evaluation of the model results challenging, complicates comparisons between models, and limits the reproducibility of the models. Here, we aim to provide an overview of the possible steps that could be undertaken to make economic models more transparent and encourage model developers to share more detailed calculations and assumptions with their peers. Scenarios with different levels of transparency (i.e., how much information is disclosed) and reach of transparency (i.e., who has access to the disclosed information) are discussed, and five key concerns (copyrights, model misuse, confidential data, software, and time/resources) pertaining to model transparency are presented, along with possible solutions. While a shift toward open-source models is underway in health economics, as has happened before in other research fields, the challenges ahead should not be underestimated. Importantly, there is a pressing need to find an acceptable trade-off between the added value of model transparency and the time and resources needed to achieve such transparency. To this end, it will be crucial to set incentives at different stakeholder levels. Despite the many challenges, the many benefits of publicly sharing economic models make increased transparency a goal worth pursuing.

The Economic Burden of Nocturia on the U.S. Health Care System and Society: A National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Nocturia, characterized as waking during the main sleep period to urinate, is a common condition. Persistent nocturia results in sleep fragmentation with deleterious effects on health and well-being. Yet, there are limited data on the economic burden of nocturia in the United States. OBJECTIVE: To assess the association of nocturia with health care resource utilization (HRU), work productivity, and self-rated health while estimating the societal costs of nocturia in the United States in 2017. METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES; 2005-2006 to 2013-2014). Adults aged ≥ 18 years (excluding pregnant women) were stratified into individuals with nocturia (≥ 2 voids/night) and individuals without nocturia (< 2 voids/night), based on the threshold for clinically significant nocturia. Outcomes were self-reported and included HRU (hospitalizations, outpatient visits); work productivity (weekly hours worked, employment); and current health status. Multivariable regression analyses adjusting for age, race, sex, body mass index, insurance status, education level, alcohol use, smoking status, and self-reported comorbid conditions were used to compare the 2 cohorts, overall and stratified by age group (20-44 years, 45-64 years, and 65+ years) to distinguish the effects on different age groups including the Medicare-aged population. Excess direct health care costs and indirect productivity costs associated with nocturia in the United States were then calculated using a prevalence-based approach and available literature (i.e., nocturia prevalence estimates, aggregated unit costs by HRU type, and average hourly earnings in the United States). RESULTS: 22,300 individuals were identified, and 24% had nocturia (≥ 2 voids/night). Median age was 55.2 and 43.2 years among individuals with and without nocturia, respectively, and the proportion of males was 43.3% and 51.3%, respectively. Individuals with nocturia had significantly more HRU, including hospitalizations and outpatient visits, worked significantly fewer hours weekly, and were significantly less likely to be employed when compared with those without nocturia. They were also significantly less likely to report being in very good/excellent health. These comparisons remained statistically significant across age groups. Total excess direct health care costs were $62.9 billion (hospitalization: $47.6 billion; outpatient: $15.3 billion). Total excess indirect productivity costs were $151.7 billion. Altogether, costs were estimated at $214.5 billion, equivalent to $3,491 per individual with nocturia. Individuals aged 20-44 years incurred 23.5% of total excess costs, while those aged 45-64 and 65+ years incurred 48.2% and 28.3%, respectively. Sensitivity analyses based on lower prevalence estimates resulted in costs of $94.0 billion, while those based on higher prevalence estimates reached up to $231.1 billion. CONCLUSIONS: Nocturia is associated with a substantial economic burden in the United States even when evaluated based on lower prevalence estimates. This study underscores the importance of timely diagnosis and management of nocturia patients to alleviate health-related and economic consequences to patients and society. DISCLOSURES: This work was supported by Ferring Pharmaceuticals, which contributed to and approved the study design and participated in the interpretation of data, review, and approval of the manuscript. Gauthier-Loiselle, Gagnon-Sanschagrin, and Wu are employees of Analysis Group, which received consultancy fees from Ferring Pharmaceuticals for work on this study. Jhaveri is a full-time employee of Ferring Pharmaceuticals. Parts of this work were presented as a poster presentation at AMCP Nexus 2018; October 22-25, 2018; Orlando, FL.

Economic Impact of Non-Medical Switching from Originator Biologics to Biosimilars: A Systematic Literature Review.

INTRODUCTION: A systematic literature review was conducted to review and summarize the economic impact of non-medical switching (NMS) from biologic originators to their biosimilars (i.e., switching a patient's medication for reasons irrelevant to the patient's health). METHODS: English publications reporting healthcare resource utilization (HRU) or costs associated with biosimilar NMS were searched in PubMed and EMBASE over the past 10 years and from selected scientific conferences over the past 3 years, along with gray literature for all biologics with an approved biosimilar (e.g., tumor-necrosis factor inhibitors, erythropoiesis-stimulating agents, insulin and hormone therapies). RESULTS: A total of 1311 publications were retrieved, where 54 studies met the selection criteria. Seventeen studies reported increased real-world HRU or costs related to biosimilar NMS, e.g., higher rates of surgery (11%), steroid use (13%) and biosimilar dose escalating (6-35.4%). Among the studies that the estimated cost impact associated with NMS, 33 reported drug costs reduction, 12 reported healthcare costs post-NMS without a detailed breakdown, and 5 reported NMS setup and managing costs. Cost estimation/simulation studies demonstrated the cost reduction associated with NMS. However, variation across studies was substantial because of heterogeneity in study designs and assumptions (e.g., disease areas, scenarios of drug price discount rates, cost components, population size, study period, etc.). CONCLUSION: Real-world studies reporting the economic impact of biosimilar NMS separately from drug costs are emerging, and those that reported such results found increased HRU in patients with biosimilar NMS. Studies of cost estimation have been largely limited to drug prices. Comprehensive evaluation of the economic impact of NMS should incorporate all important elements of healthcare service needs such as drug price, biologic rebates, HRU, NMS program setup, administration and monitoring costs. FUNDING: AbbVie.