Treatment patterns and healthcare costs among patients with psoriasis initiating apremilast or biologics: a retrospective claims database cohort analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare treatment patterns and healthcare costs for patients with psoriasis who initiate apremilast, tumor necrosis factor inhibitor, or interleukin inhibitor. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used Optum Clinformatics® Data Mart to identify propensity score-matched patients initiating apremilast, tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, or interleukin inhibitors, with 12-month baseline and 24-month follow-up data. Switch, discontinuation, persistence, healthcare resource utilization, and total healthcare costs were assessed. RESULTS: Twenty-four-month switch rates were highest for tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (32%), followed by apremilast (21%) then interleukin inhibitors (14%). Mean (SD) per-patient-per-month costs for switchers were lowest for apremilast ($4213 [$2304]), higher for tumor necrosis factor inhibitors ($5274 [$2280]), and highest for interleukin inhibitors ($5539 [$2296]; p < .001), primarily attributable to pharmacy costs: $3466 (apremilast), $4432 (tumor necrosis factor inhibitor), and $4721 (interleukin inhibitor). LIMITATIONS: Psoriasis severity is absent from claims data; cost outcomes may be influenced by more severe psoriasis being more costly. CONCLUSION: Switching psoriasis treatment is common and increases over time. Apremilast initiators had lower switch rates and costs compared with tumor necrosis factor inhibitors, despite lower effectiveness reported in previous studies, perhaps indicating patient preference for oral treatment. Additional oral options may be desirable for this population.

Real-world treatment patterns and healthcare costs in patients with psoriasis taking systemic oral or biologic therapies.

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis is a chronic, immune-mediated, systemic inflammatory disorder associated with high costs. This study evaluated real-world treatment patterns and associated costs in patients in the United States with psoriasis initiating systemic oral or biologic treatments. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used IBM® (now Merative™) MarketScan® Commercial and Medicare claims (1 January 2006-31 December 2019) to evaluate patterns of switching, discontinuation, and nonswitching in two cohorts of patients initiating oral or biologic systemic therapy. Total pre-switch and post-switch costs were reported per-patient per-month (PPPM). RESULTS: Each cohort was analyzed (oral, n = 11,993; biologic; n = 9753). Among the oral and biologic cohorts, 32% and 15% discontinued index and any systemic treatment within 1 year of initiation; 40% and 62% remained on index therapy; and 28% and 23% switched treatment, respectively. In the oral and biologic cohorts, total PPPM costs within 1 year of initiation for nonswitchers, patients who discontinued, and patients who switched were $2594, $1402, and $3956, respectively, and $5035, $3112, and $5833, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study identified lower persistence in the oral treatment cohort, higher costs associated with switching, and a need for safe and effective oral treatment options for patients with psoriasis to delay the switch to biologic therapy.

Access to psoriasis treatment in Brazil and Chile: A cross-sectional multicentre Global Healthcare Study on Psoriasis.

BACKGROUND: Sufficient data on access to systemic treatment for patients with psoriasis living in Latin America (LA) including Brazil and Chile are lacking. Understanding the availability and limiting factors of access to treatments can help to improve patient care and decrease long-term healthcare costs. OBJECTIVES: In association with the Global Psoriasis Atlas, this cross-sectional survey study analysed the availability and insurance reimbursement of systemic treatments for adult patients with psoriasis in Brazil and Chile. METHODS: A multicentre, cross-sectional Global Healthcare Study on Psoriasis was performed in Brazil and Chile in 2020. For each eligible adult patient with psoriasis, doctors and nurses completed a 48-item questionnaire about clinical aspects of psoriasis including the Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI), body surface area (BSA) score and the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), as well as the availability of systemic treatments and insurance reimbursement status. Between-country differences were compared with Wilcoxon rank sum tests for continuous variables, and a χ2-test or Fisher's exact test, where appropriate, for categorical variables. The median and interquartile range (IQR) was calculated for non-normal distributed data. RESULTS: A total of 1424 patients with psoriasis from 43 centres [27 centres in Brazil (n = 826) and 16 in Chile (n = 598)], were included with a mean (SD) age of 49.1 (16.3) and 49.2 (15.1) years, respectively. Unstratified analyses revealed that patients with psoriasis in Chile had more severe disease than those in Brazil [PASI 11.6 vs. 8.4 (P < 0.001) and BSA 14.7 vs. 12.0 (P = 0.003), respectively]. For patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, defined as PASI and/or BSA ≥ 10, systemic nonbiologic drugs were available (81.2% in Brazil and 65.3% in Chile, P ≤ 0.001), but only 37.0% of patients in Brazil and 27.3% in Chile received biologics (P = 0.01). Lack of availability and/or lack of insurance reimbursement for biologic drugs for patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis was reported for 22.2% (50 of 225) in Brazil and 67.9% (148 of 218) in Chile (P < 0.001). Patients with no access to biologic therapies due to lack of availability/insurance reimbursement had a median PASI of 9.15 (IQR 3.00-14.25) in Brazil and 12.0 (IQR 5.00-19.00) in Chile (P = 0.007), as well as a median BSA of 7.0 (IQR 3.00-15.00) and 12.0 (IQR 5.00-22.50) (P = 0.002), and median DLQI of 11.0 (6.00-15.00) and 21.0 (6.50-25.00) (P = 0.007), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Chilean patients had significantly more severe psoriasis compared with Brazilian patients in our study. While nonbiologic treatments for moderate-to-severe psoriasis were available in both LA countries, there is a high need for improvement in access to more effective psoriasis treatments including biologics. Our results highlight a significant gap between treatment recommendations in international psoriasis guidelines and real-world situations in Brazil and Chile.

Economic Burden of Comorbidities in Patients with Psoriasis in the USA.

INTRODUCTION: This study assessed the comorbidity burden, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and costs associated with patients with moderate to severe psoriasis (PsO) compared with a matched cohort of the general population without PsO in the USA. METHODS: Comorbidity-related HCRU (incidence rate ratios [IRRs]) and direct medical cost burden (per patient per month [PPPM] 2020 USD) in patients with moderate to severe PsO in the USA, previously apremilast- and biologic-naive, but currently treated, versus the general population were assessed through a retrospective cohort study using IBM (now Merative) MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Claims data (1 January 2006 to 31 December 2019). Comorbidities included cardiovascular, mental health, pulmonary, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, peripheral vascular, liver, obesity, and other autoimmune disorders. RESULTS: There are increased all-cause HCRU and costs in patients with PsO compared with the general population. These differences (PsO-general population) in HCRU and costs (IRR visits; PPPM) are associated with specific comorbidities, including mental health (1.08; $372), chronic pulmonary disease (1.07; $135), diabetes (1.10; $159), hyperlipidemia (1.13; $203), hypertension (1.13; $305), liver disease (1.21; $360), and obesity (1.12; $145, all P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PsO experience a higher economic burden of comorbidities than the general population despite using currently available systemic treatments for PsO.

Psoriasis is a disease that causes itchy and painful sores on the skin. People with psoriasis can develop several other diseases, known as comorbidities. These comorbidities include cardiovascular disease, depression, diabetes, hypertension, and obesity, and they pose a large economic burden to individuals, households, and society. Existing estimates of this burden are outdated because new treatments have become available for psoriasis. The aim of this study was to assess the economic burden of comorbidities in people with psoriasis compared with the economic burden in the general population in the USA. Healthcare claims reported in the IBM (now Merative) MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Claims database were used. This study assessed the total number of health-related visits to a doctor's office, hospital, or emergency department and the total costs of these visits in both groups. This study found that people with psoriasis had more health visits and costs because of comorbidities than the general population, despite using advanced treatments for their psoriasis.

Real-World Effectiveness of Newly Initiated Systemic Therapy for Atopic Dermatitis in the United States: A Claims Database Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is associated with significant quality-of-life and economic burdens. Real-world evidence is needed to identify optimal treatment pathways for AD. Here we evaluate real-world effectiveness of systemic therapies for moderate-to-severe AD in the USA. METHODS: Data (September 2016 to December 2019) were from the IQVIA Health Plan Claims data set (IQVIA, Danbury, CT) from patients aged 12 years or older with AD (ICD-9/10-CM, 691.8/L20.x) initiating a systemic immunosuppressive (SIS) agent (methotrexate, cyclosporine, mycophenolate, or azathioprine) or dupilumab and continuously enrolled for at least 6 months before and after the index date. Indicators of non-response (i.e., adding on/switching systemic therapy, AD-related inpatient/emergency room visits, or incident staphylococcal/streptococcal skin infection) and predictors of non-response were evaluated. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier rates and times were obtained; Cox regression models were used. RESULTS: In 3249 patients, 45.4% exhibited at least one indicator of non-response, with median time to non-response being longer for dupilumab than for any SIS therapy (27.0 vs 4.0-7.7 months, respectively). Key non-response predictors were age, geographic region, and baseline number of annual AD-related medical visits. CONCLUSION: Non-response was common in patients with AD who required systemic treatment, and non-response indicators occurred significantly more frequently with SIS treatment than with dupilumab treatment.

Cost-effectiveness of tildrakizumab for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relative cost-effectiveness of tildrakizumab and other biologic and targeted systemic treatments compared with a mix of topical therapies, phototherapies, and other conventional systemic therapies as first-line treatment for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis from a United States payer's perspective. METHODS: A Markov model consisting of health states based on Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI) response rate categories and death was developed. The probabilities of achieving PASI responses were derived from a network meta-analysis based on published efficacy data. Health care costs and effectiveness measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated. Incremental costs per QALY gained of each biologic/targeted first-line treatment versus a mix of conventional treatments were compared to provide relative cost-effectiveness among biologic and targeted first-line treatments. RESULTS: Over 10 years, the incremental cost per QALY gained compared with a mix of topical therapies, phototherapies, and other oral systemic therapies was lowest for brodalumab, infliximab, apremilast, and tildrakizumab, followed by secukinumab, ixekizumab, guselkumab, adalimumab, ustekinumab, and etanercept. The position of tildrakizumab relative to the other treatments remained the same across multiple scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: Tildrakizumab is among the most cost-effective first-line therapies for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis and is more cost-effective than secukinumab, ixekizumab, guselkumab, adalimumab, ustekinumab, and etanercept.

Dose escalation and associated costs in biologic treatment of psoriasis based on real-world data.

OBJECTIVES: This study documents real-world patterns and additional costs of above-label (≥10% above the recommended maintenance dose) use of biologics in patients with plaque psoriasis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a descriptive, retrospective cohort analysis using the IBM MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Databases. Adult patients diagnosed with plaque psoriasis initiating treatment with etanercept, adalimumab, ixekizumab, or secukinumab between 1 January 2015 and 30 November 2019 (index) were eligible. Only biologics approved prior to 2017 were included to ensure data for all agents was available throughout the study period. Patients had no other indications for biologics of interest. Outcomes were measured in the 12-month follow-up period after start of maintenance dosing. RESULTS: Of 6453 patients included, 708 (11.0%) received etanercept, 4654 (72.1%) received adalimumab, 228 (3.5%) received ixekizumab, and 863 (13.4%) received secukinumab. Above-label dosing was recorded in 326 (46.0%) patients receiving etanercept, 513 (11.0%) receiving adalimumab, 40 (17.5%) receiving ixekizumab, and 79 (9.2%) receiving secukinumab. Mean time to above-label use for all treatments was 50.7-99.5 days; the median was 21-37 days. Mean duration of above-label use for all treatments was 130-196 days; the median was 35-175 days. Mean total additional annual psoriasis-related medical/pharmacy costs associated with above-label use were $312/$16,475 for etanercept, $278/$9,773 for adalimumab, $124/$5,202 for ixekizumab, and $277/$9,288 for secukinumab. Above-label use was generally not associated with safety concerns; however, gastrointestinal and combined "other" nonrespiratory infections were significantly more frequent in patients receiving adalimumab above-label. CONCLUSIONS: Above-label use of biologics for psoriasis treatment was most frequent for patients receiving etanercept, followed by ixekizumab, adalimumab, and secukinumab. Above-label vs on-label use resulted in additional costs but few significant safety concerns.

Joint AAD-NPF Guidelines of care for the management and treatment of psoriasis with topical therapy and alternative medicine modalities for psoriasis severity measures.

Psoriasis is a chronic, inflammatory, multisystem disease that affects up to 3.2% of the United States population. This guideline addresses important clinical questions that arise in psoriasis management and care and provides recommendations based on the available evidence. The treatment of psoriasis with topical agents and with alternative medicine will be reviewed, emphasizing treatment recommendations and the role of dermatologists in monitoring and educating patients regarding benefits as well as risks that may be associated. This guideline will also address the severity assessment methods of psoriasis in adults.

Comparative cost-effectiveness of tildrakizumab and other commonly used treatments for moderate-to-severe psoriasis.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the cost-effectiveness of tildrakizumab with other commonly used biologics and apremilast as the first-line treatment for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis from a US health plan's perspective. METHODS: A 10-year cost-effectiveness model was developed to compare the incremental cost per extra month with a Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) 75 response. Patients were assumed to receive one of the treatments evaluated as their first-line treatment at the outset of the analysis. Nonresponders (PASI <75) discontinued their current treatment; 25% went on to receive a mix of topical therapies, phototherapies, and other systemic therapies, while 75% received a second-line therapy before receiving a mix of topical therapies, phototherapies, and other systemic therapies. Direct medical costs were calculated based on drug acquisition, administration, and monitoring costs. RESULTS: The incremental cost per extra month a patient had a PASI 75 response was lowest for brodalumab ($3,685), infliximab ($4,102), apremilast ($4,770), and tildrakizumab ($5,150), followed by risankizumab ($5,319), secukinumab ($5,675), guselkumab ($5,784), ixekizumab ($5,900), adalimumab ($5,943), ustekinumab ($6,131), etanercept ($6,618), and certolizumab pegol ($13,476). CONCLUSION: Tildrakizumab was among the most cost-effective first-line treatments for moderate-to-severe psoriasis and was more cost-effective than risankizumab, secukinumab, guselkumab, ixekizumab, adalimumab, ustekinumab, etanercept, and certolizumab pegol.

Real-world switch patterns and healthcare costs in biologic-naive psoriasis patients initiating apremilast or biologics.

Aim: Treatment switching and healthcare costs were compared among biologic-naive psoriasis patients initiating apremilast or biologics with ≥12 months pre-/post-index continuous enrollment in Optum Clinformatics™ Data Mart. Methods: After propensity score matching, switch rates (new therapy post-index) and days between index and switch were assessed. Total and per-patient per-month costs by service type were assessed. Results: Apremilast initiators (n = 533) were matched and compared with biologic initiators (n = 955). Twelve-month cumulative switch rates and days to switch were similar. Apremilast initiators had significantly lower total healthcare costs than biologic initiators; apremilast switchers and nonswitchers had significantly lower per-patient per-month costs than biologic switchers and nonswitchers, driven mainly by reduced outpatient pharmacy costs. Conclusion: Apremilast initiators had lower healthcare costs even with treatment switching.

Treatment Switch Patterns and Healthcare Costs in Biologic-Naive Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis.

INTRODUCTION: We compared treatment switch patterns and healthcare costs among biologic-naive patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who initiated apremilast or biologics. METHODS: A 1:2 propensity score match was used to adjust administrative claims data for adults initiating apremilast or biologics from January 1, 2014, to September 30, 2016, for possible selection bias. Patients had at least 12 months of pre- and post-index continuous enrollment in the Optum Clinformatics™ Data Mart database. Outcomes included switch frequency, days to switch, adherence on index treatment, and healthcare costs (total and per patient per month). Switch rate was defined as the proportion of patients who switched to a new treatment after initiation of the index treatment, and days to switch was calculated as the days between initiation of the index treatment and initiation of the new treatment. Adherence was calculated using the proportion of days covered and the medication possession ratio. The t test and chi-square, Kaplan-Meier, and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to evaluate differences between the cohorts. RESULTS: Patient characteristics and switch rates were similar between the matched apremilast (n = 170) and biologic (n = 327) cohorts. After matching, patient characteristics were similar between the matched cohorts. The 12-month switch rates were similar for patients initiating apremilast versus those on biologics (17.7% vs. 25.1%, P = 0.06). This trend was similar at 6 months (7.7% vs. 13.2%, P = 0.07) and 18 months (24.4% vs. 29.3%, P = 0.33). Regardless of treatment switching, 12-month total healthcare costs were lower with apremilast versus biologics (all: $28,423 vs. $41,178, P < 0.0001; switched: $39,803 vs. $51,517, P = 0.0040; did not switch: $25,984 vs. $37,717, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Biologic-naive patients with PsA who initiated apremilast had switch rates similar to biologic users and significantly lower healthcare costs, regardless of treatment switching.

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory disease that affects an estimated 30% of psoriasis patients who use systemic therapy. Symptoms of PsA, such as joint swelling and tenderness, can be painful and disabling and may worsen quality of life. PsA can also impart a substantial economic burden. Treatment for moderate to severe PsA often involves the use of systemic oral medications (e.g., conventional systemic treatments such as methotrexate or targeted systemic treatments such as apremilast) or biologic therapy given by injection or infusion. Because PsA symptoms and responses to treatment can vary, patients may switch treatments over time. More research is needed to better understand how switching treatments affects healthcare costs among patients starting treatment with apremilast or a biologic for PsA. This study compared treatment switching and healthcare costs among patients with PsA who had never been treated with a biologic and who started treatment with apremilast or a biologic for PsA. Rates of treatment switching at 12 months were similar for patients starting treatment with apremilast versus those starting a biologic. Patients starting treatment with apremilast had significantly lower total healthcare costs compared with those starting a biologic, even if they later switched to a biologic. Healthcare costs calculated per patient per month (PPPM) were also lower with apremilast versus biologics, driven by lower PPPM pharmacy costs. These findings suggest that starting treatment with apremilast may be an effective and cost-effective strategy for managing PsA, even for patients who later switch to a biologic.

Effectiveness comparison and incremental cost-per-responder analysis of calcipotriene 0.005%/betamethasone dipropionate 0.064% foam vs. halobetasol 0.01%/tazarotene 0.045% lotion for plaque psoriasis: a matching-adjusted indirect comparative analysis.

Background: The fixed-dose combination foam formulation of calcipotriene 0.005% plus betamethasone dipropionate 0.064% (Cal/BD) has demonstrated efficacy and a favorable safety profile for the treatment of plaque psoriasis. Recently, a topical lotion of the combination of halobetasol 0.01% plus tazarotene 0.045% (HP/TAZ) was approved for treating adult plaque psoriasis. Currently, no head-to-head studies have compared Cal/BD foam with HP/TAZ lotion.Objective: Compare the effectiveness and drug incremental cost per responder (ICPR) of Cal/BD foam vs. HP/TAZ lotion in moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.Methods: An anchor-based, matching-adjusted indirect comparison was conducted for PGA treatment success (Physician's Global Assessment of "clear" or "almost clear," [PGA 0/1] with at least a 2-point improvement) using individual patient data from 3 randomized clinical studies of Cal/BD foam and published data from 2 randomized, Phase 3 clinical studies of HP/TAZ lotion. The number needed to treat and ICPR were also calculated.Results: After reweighting of patients in the Cal/BD foam studies to match summary baseline characteristics of the HP/TAZ lotion study patients and anchoring to vehicle effect, 4 weeks of Cal/BD foam produced a significantly greater rate of treatment success than 8 weeks of HP/TAZ lotion treatment (51.4 vs. 30.7%; treatment difference = 20.7%, p < .001). The number needed to treat with Cal/BD foam was also less than HP/TAZ lotion (1.9 vs. 3.3). Using US wholesale acquisition costs and equal weekly consumption rates, the incremental cost per PGA 0/1 responder relative to vehicle for Cal/BD foam was $3,988 and was 37% lower compared with HP/TAZ lotion ($6,294).Conclusions: The indirect comparison analyses showed that Cal/BD foam was associated with a greater rate of treatment success, lower ICPR, and quicker treatment response than HP/TAZ lotion in adult patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis.

Psoriasis-associated itch: etiology, assessment, impact, and management.

Pruritus, a very broad, subjective, and complex symptom, troubles the majority of patients with psoriasis. However, the subjective and multidimensional nature of the symptom renders it challenging for patients to appropriately communicate their experiences with itch to providers. This review explores current perspectives regarding the underlying mechanisms, assessment tools, burden, and treatment modalities for psoriatic pruritus. It emphasizes the significance of incorporating a standardized, thorough, and verified metric that incorporates severity, distribution, and character of pruritus as well as its effects on various aspects of quality of life. It also underscores the importance of continued research to fully understand the pathogenesis of psoriatic itch for establishment of novel, targeted therapeutics.

Treatment of Medicare Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Psoriasis who Cannot Afford Biologics or Apremilast.

Elderly patients are a group with a high frequency of psoriasis. Their disease burden has negative impacts on their quality of life. While there is a clear need to treat these patients, there are challenges in doing so. This work seeks to define the challenges that exist in treating elderly Medicare patients, as well as to provide treatment suggestions for providers to follow if they encounter one or more of these challenges. Providers face the following challenges when creating treatment plants for elderly patients with psoriasis: difficulty in obtaining drug coverage through Medicare, increased medical comorbidities, and polypharmacy. Providers aim for regimens that are affordable, safe, and efficacious, but it is not always clear how to achieve this combination, especially in elderly Medicare patients. This work is relevant in that it aims to explain the logistical roadblocks posed by Medicare coverage and provide solutions for commonly encountered issues in the treatment of a disabling and common disease in a high-risk population. Specifically, alternative treatment options to biologics and small-molecule inhibitors are discussed and include topical therapies, phototherapy, methotrexate, acitretin, and cyclosporine and for psoriatic arthritis include corticosteroids and leflunomide. The specific risks and benefits of these therapies in the elderly population are provided, allowing providers to make patient-specific decisions about optimal regimens.