Expanded access to cancer treatments from conversion to neutropenia prophylaxis with biosimilar filgrastim-sndz.

AIM: Biosimilar medicines offer significant cost-savings potential over their reference products, which can be re-allocated to provide access to other cancer treatments on a budget-neutral basis. METHODS: Simulation study using cost data for the USA under consideration of several prophylaxis patterns. RESULTS: Potential savings from conversion from reference filgrastim to biosimilar filgrastim-sndz are significant. These savings expand budget-neutral access to novel immunotherapies (obinutuzumab; pembrolizumab) or supportive care (filgrastim-sndz). CONCLUSION: The combination of biosimilar savings and expanded access increases the value of cancer care as the same supportive care is provided at lower cost, additional cancer care is enabled at no additional cost, and more patients will have access to cancer care.

Patient preferences for treatment attributes in moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a discrete choice experiment.

Purpose: Evidence on treatment preferences of patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) in the United States (US) is limited and an assessment of treatment preferences in this group is warranted.Materials and methods: An online discrete choice experiment survey was conducted (June 2023) among US adults with self-reported moderate-to-severe AD or experience with systemic therapy who had inadequate response to topical treatments. Preference weights estimated from conditional logistic regression models were used to calculate willingness to trade off and attributes' relative importance (RI).Results: Participants (N = 300; mean age: 45 years; 70% females; 52% systemic therapy experienced) preferred treatments with higher efficacy, lower risk of adverse events (AEs), and less frequent blood tests (p < .05). Treatment attributes, from high to low RI, were itch control (38%), risk of cancer (23%), risk of respiratory infections (18%), risk of heart problems (11%), sustained improvement in skin appearance (5%), blood test frequency (3%), and frequency and mode of administration (2%); together, AE attributes accounted for more than half of the RI.Conclusions: Participants preferred AD treatments that maximize itch control while minimizing AE risks, whereas mode of administration had little impact on preferences. Understanding patients' preferences may help improve shared decision-making, potentially leading to enhanced patient satisfaction with treatment, increased engagement, and better clinical outcomes.

Impact of initiating antiemetic prophylaxis with palonosetron versus ondansetron on risk of uncontrolled chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in patients with lung cancer receiving multi-day chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to examine the risk of uncontrolled chemotherapy-induced nausea/vomiting (CINV) among lung cancer patients receiving multi-day chemotherapy and ondansetron- or palonosetron-initiated prophylactic antiemetic regimens in a community oncology setting. METHODS: The Georgia Cancer Specialists electronic medical records database was used to retrospectively identify lung cancer patients who received multi-day cisplatin or carboplatin regimens with ondansetron or palonosetron on day 1 between April 1, 2006 and July 31, 2009. Uncontrolled CINV events were identified through ICD-9-CM codes (nausea/vomiting), CPT codes (dehydration), rescue medications, nausea/vomiting hospitalizations, and/or antiemetic therapy after last chemotherapy administration of the cycle. Risk for uncontrolled CINV, up to 7 days after last chemotherapy administration, was analyzed at cycle level using logistic regression with regressors of gender, age, number of chemotherapy administration days, Charlson comorbidity index, cancer type, multicancer diagnoses, and chemotherapy regimen. RESULTS: A total of 209 palonosetron and 153 ondansetron patients (702 and 515 cycles, respectively) met the inclusion criteria. Palonosetron patients were significantly older (mean 67.9 versus 63.9 years; P < 0.0001), with no significant difference in gender, baseline comorbidity score, or multicancer diagnosis. Palonosetron cycles had 63% lower risk for uncontrolled CINV events versus ondansetron cycles [odds ratio (OR) 0.37; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25-0.54; P < 0.0001]. Sub-analysis by chemotherapy supported overall analysis (cisplatin OR 0.09; 95% CI 0.04-0.25; P < 0.0001; carboplatin OR 0.46; 95% CI 0.30-0.70; P = 0.0003). CONCLUSION: In this retrospective analysis of lung cancer patients, multi-day chemotherapy cycles administered with palonosetron on day 1 were associated with a significantly lower risk for uncontrolled CINV events versus ondansetron-initiated chemotherapy cycles.

Impact of 5-HT3 receptor antagonists on chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: 1st generation 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor antagonists (5-HT3 RAs), and palonosetron, a 2nd generation 5-HT3 RA, are indicated for the prevention of chemotherapy (CT)-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) associated with moderately (MEC) and highly emetogenic CT agents (HEC). This study explores the impact of step therapy policies requiring use of an older 5-HT3 RA before palonosetron on risk of CINV associated with hospital or emergency department (ED) admissions. METHODS: Patients who received cyclophosphamide post breast cancer (BC) surgery or who were diagnosed with lung cancer on carboplatin (LC-carboplatin) or cisplatin (LC-cisplatin) were selected from PharMetrics' (IMS LifeLink) claims dataset (2005-2008). Patients were followed for 6 months from initial CT administration for CINV events identified through ICD-9-CM codes. Patients were grouped into those initiated with older, generic 5-HT3 RAs (ondansetron, granisetron, and dolasetron) and those initiated and maintained on palonosetron throughout study follow-up. CINV events and CINV days were analyzed using multivariate regressions controlling for demographic and clinical variables. RESULTS: Eligible patients numbered 3,606 in BC, 4,497 in LC-carboplatin and 1,154 in LC-cisplatin cohorts, with 52%, 40%, and 34% in the palonosetron group, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two 5-HT3 RA groups in age or Charlson Comorbidity Index among the two MEC cohorts (BC and LC-carboplatin). Among the LC-cisplatin cohort, palonosetron users were older with more males than the older 5-HT3 RA group (age: 60.1 vs. 61.3; males, 66.9% vs. 56.9%). Compared to the older 5-HT3 RAs, the palonosetron groups incurred 22%-51% fewer 5-HT3 RA pharmacy claims, had fewer patients with CINV events (3.5% vs. 5.5% in BC, 9.5% vs. 12.8% in LC-carboplatin, 16.4% vs. 21.7% in LC-cisplatin), and had lower risk for CINV events (odds ratios 0.62, 0.71, or 0.71, respectively; p<0.05). The BC and LC-carboplatin palonosetron groups experienced 50% and 30% fewer CINV days than the generic 5-HT3 RA group (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with breast or lung cancer initiated and maintained on palonosetron were at significantly lower risk for potentially costly CINV versus those on older 5-HT3 RAs. Further studies on impact of step therapy policy are warranted in order to minimize the clinical and economic burden of CINV.

Comparison of healthcare resource utilization and costs of patients with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer treated with ribociclib versus other CDK4/6 inhibitors.

AIMS: To assess healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and healthcare costs among women with hormone receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer (HR+/HER2- aBC) treated with cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors. METHODS: Women with HR+/HER2- aBC, initiating CDK4/6 inhibitor treatment were identified using IBM MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental databases (Q1/2000-Q3/2018). Based on the first CDK4/6 inhibitor patients received (index therapy), three cohorts were identified: abemaciclib, palbociclib, and ribociclib. The baseline period (six months preceding treatment initiation) was used to describe patient characteristics. All-cause HRU and direct total healthcare costs (medical and pharmacy) from treatment initiation until the earliest of the end of index therapy, continuous health plan enrollment, or data availability, were compared for the ribociclib cohort versus the abemaciclib and palbociclib cohorts, separately, using weighted regression analyses balanced on baseline covariates. RESULTS: Average age at treatment initiation was ∼60 years and the majority of patients were postmenopausal (abemaciclib: 92%; palbociclib: 92%; ribociclib: 79%). Average follow-up duration was 3.9, 8.8, and 5.9 months for the abemaciclib, palbociclib, and ribociclib cohorts, respectively. After reweighting, HRU was not statistically different between the ribociclib and abemaciclib cohorts, however, the ribociclib cohort incurred significantly lower total healthcare costs (-$5,452; 95% CI: -$8,726; -$1,139, p = .01). Medical costs (driven by outpatient costs) and pharmacy costs (driven by CDK4/6 inhibitor costs) were significantly lower for the ribociclib cohort. Among the reweighted ribociclib and palbociclib cohorts, HRU and total healthcare costs were not statistically different, although the ribociclib cohort had lower outpatient costs per-patient-per-month (-$1,245, 95% CI: -$2,349; -$37, p = .04). LIMITATIONS: Due to the retrospective, observational design, treatment cohorts were not randomly assigned. CONCLUSIONS: During CDK4/6 inhibitor therapy, ribociclib patients tended to incur lower medical and pharmacy costs than abemaciclib patients. Among ribociclib and palbociclib patients, HRU and healthcare costs were similar.

Evaluation of access to care issues in patients with breast cancer.

AIMS: System-level efforts have been deployed to improve oncology care and access while reducing utilization and costs. Understanding the nature of access to care from the perspective of patients themselves is an unmet need. This study examined access to care in a population of women with breast cancer and its relationship to overall patient satisfaction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with breast cancer from six oncology clinics in five states completed a survey during routine office visits. Access to care (higher scores indicated increasing access barriers), overall patient satisfaction, and patient demographic/clinical characteristics were measured. The relationships between access (composite and factor scores) and satisfaction were assessed using multivariable analyses controlling for age (the only significant characteristic from bivariate analyses). RESULTS: A total of 180 patients completed the survey. Factor analysis of access to care items revealed an 8-factor measure - Insurance, Health System, Emotional, Holistic Treatment, Family Support, Knowledge/Understanding, Information Quality, and Financial Support - with high reliability (Composite: Cronbach alpha = 0.93; Factors: Cronbach alpha range = 0.85-0.91). Access composite score was moderately low (mean = 1.90), indicating an overall low level of access barriers, and overall patient satisfaction was high (mean = 4.59). The composite score (p < .001) and the Health System and Knowledge/Understanding factors (p < .01) were significant and negative predictors of overall satisfaction. LIMITATIONS: Study sites were high functioning clinics and all, but one, are Oncology Care Model practices. Thus, the scope of access to care issues for patients of under-resourced clinics might not be well addressed. CONCLUSIONS: Access to care overall and by factor was significantly predictive of patient satisfaction with care. In addition, access to care factors varied across several demographic and clinical characteristics. Future strategies that address access to care challenges should consider these modifiable, patient-centric, and system-based issues.

Economic modeling for the US of the cost-efficiency and associated expanded treatment access of conversion to biosimilar pegfilgrastim-bmez from reference pegfilgrastim.

Aims: For this economic analysis, we aimed to model: (1) the cost-efficiency of prophylaxis with biosimilar pegfilgrastim-bmez for chemotherapy-induced (febrile) neutropenia (CIN/FN) compared to reference pegfilgrastim, and (2) the expanded access to CIN/FN prophylaxis and anti-neoplastic treatment that could be achieved with biosimilar cost-savings on a budget-neutral basis.Methods: In a hypothetical panel of 20,000 cancer patients receiving CIN/FN prophylaxis and using the average sales price (ASP) for the second quarter of 2019 for reference pegfilgrastim, we: conducted an ex ante simulation from the payer perspective of the cost-savings of 10-100% conversion from reference to biosimilar pegfilgrastim-bmez using drug price discounting ranging from 10-35%; estimated the budget-neutral expanded access to biosimilar pegfilgrastim-bmez enabled by these cost-savings; and estimated the budget-neutral expanded access to anti-neoplastic treatment with pembrolizumab. The simulations were replicated using fourth quarter 2019 wholesale acquisition cost (WAC) for reference pegfilgrastim and biosimilar pegfilgrastim-bmez in a post facto analysis.Results: In ASP simulations, cost-savings of using pegfilgrastim-bmez over reference pegfilgrastim in a 20,000 patient panel range from $1.3 M (at 15% price discount) to $3 M (35%) at 10% conversion rate and from $6.4 M to $14.9 M, respectively, at 50% conversion. These savings could provide prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim-bmez to an additional 352 (15% discount) to 1,076 patients (35%) at 10% conversion or 1,764-5,384, respectively, at 50% conversion. Alternatively, savings could be reallocated for anti-neoplastic treatment with pembrolizumab to 3 (15% discount) to 9 (35%) patients at 10% conversion or 19-45, respectively, at 50% conversion. When utilizing WAC, cost-savings range from $4.6 M (10% conversion) to $23.1 M (50%) which could provide pegfilgrastim-bmez to an additional 1,174 (10% conversion) to 5,873 patients (50%).Conclusions: Prophylaxis with biosimilar pegfilgrastim-bmez increases the value of cancer care by generating significant cost-savings that could be reallocated to provide expanded access to CIN/FN prevention and anti-neoplastic therapy on a budget-neutral basis.

Multiple sclerosis relapse rates and healthcare costs of two versions of glatiramer acetate.

Objective: To compare relapse rates and healthcare costs in MS patients treated with Glatopa 20 mg (generic glatiramer acetate) versus Copaxone 20 mg in a US managed care population.Methods: A retrospective claims study was conducted using the HealthCore Integrated Research Database. Patients with ≥1 Glatopa or Copaxone claim between 01 April 2015 (Glatopa) or 01 January 2013 (Copaxone) and 30 April 2018 were included. Patients with prior Copaxone 40 mg use or <1 year continuous health plan enrollment were excluded. Patients who switched from Glatopa to Copaxone were censored. Glatopa users were matched to Copaxone users, and outcomes measured at 6-12 months follow-up.Results: A total of 357 Glatopa and 2291 Copaxone patients qualified for inclusion; 158 per cohort were retained after matching. Baseline characteristics were well-balanced (mean age 49.9 years, 75% female, mean 3.8 Copaxone fills). At baseline, 8% of patients had ≥1 relapse with mean annualized relapse rates (ARR) of 0.18; at follow-up, the relapse rates were 8% versus 15% (Glatopa versus Copaxone; p = .05), and ARRs were 0.12 versus 0.30 (p = .05). 45% of Glatopa patients switched (back) to Copaxone 20/40 mg and were censored at that point. Mean (SD) all-cause medical and pharmacy costs were $51,507 ($28,494) versus $55,085 ($37,061; p = .50). Mean MS-related costs were $45,379 ($24,732) versus $47,949 ($32,615; p = .67), of which mean disease modifying therapy costs were $42,926 ($23,196) versus $44,932 ($28,554; p = .59). Results were similar in sensitivity analyses.Conclusions: In this real-world study, MS patients treated with Glatopa experienced similar health outcomes and costs compared to those treated with Copaxone, with a trend towards lower relapse rates (borderline statistically significant) and cost savings (not statistically significant).

Febrile neutropenia hospitalization due to pegfilgrastim on-body injector failure compared to single-injection pegfilgrastim and daily injections with reference and biosimilar filgrastim: US cost simulation for lung cancer and non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Background: Guidelines recommend febrile neutropenia (FN) prophylaxis following myelotoxic chemotherapy with either daily injections of filgrastim (Neupogen®) or biosimilar filgrastim-sndz (Zarzio/Zarxio®), single-injection pegfilgrastim (Neulasta®), or pegfilgrastim administered through an on-body injector (PEG-OBI; Neulasta® Onpro®). PEG-OBI failure rates up to 6.9% have been reported, putting patients at incremental risk for FN and FN-related hospitalization. Our objective was to estimate, from a US payer perspective, the incremental costs of FN hospitalizations and the total incremental costs associated with PEG-OBI prophylaxis at varying device failure rates over assured FN prophylaxis with daily injections of filgrastim or filgrastim-sndz or a single injection of pegfilgrastim.Methods: Cost simulations comparing prophylaxis with PEG-OBI at failure rates of 1-10% versus assured prophylaxis in cycle 1 of chemotherapy were performed for panels of 10,000 patients with lung cancer treated with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide (1 analysis) or non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) treated with CHOP or CNOP (2 analyses). Daily injection scenarios were 4.3, 5, and 11 injections for lung cancer and 5, 6.5, and 11 for NHL. The analyses are from the US payer perspective.Results: For lung cancer, the total incremental cost of PEG-OBI prophylaxis at varying failure rates and durations ranged from $6,691,969‒$31,765,299 over filgrastim and $18,901,969‒$36,538,299 over filgrastim-sndz. For NHL, in scenario 1, the total incremental costs ranged from $6,794,984‒$30,361,345 over filgrastim and $19,004,984‒$35,911,345 over filgrastim-sndz; in scenario 2, the incremental costs ranged from $7,003,657‒$32,448,067 over filgrastim and $19,213,657‒$37,998,067 over filgrastim-sndz.Conclusions: In this simulation, the incremental costs of FN-related hospitalization due to PEG-OBI failure in cycle 1 compared to assured prophylaxis with reference pegfilgrastim, reference filgrastim, and biosimilar filgrastim-sndz varied depending upon the PEG-OBI failure rate and the alternative G-CSF prophylaxis option. Biosimilar filgrastim-sndz offers the greatest cost-efficiency.

A retrospective managed care claims data analysis of medication adherence to vaginal estrogen therapy: implications for clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess refill-based treatment duration and adherence to vaginal estrogen therapy (VET) in clinical practice and to compare treatment duration in women prescribed vaginal tablets (VT) or vaginal creams (VC) in clinical trials with that in clinical practice. METHODS: Adults initiating VET between January and June 2004 were identified in 57 commercial health plans in the United States and followed for up to 10 months after treatment initiation. Treatment duration (Kaplan-Meier analysis) and adherence (medication possession ratio [MPR]) were examined for VC and VT cohorts and compared with a weighted average of treatment duration calculated for seven clinical trials identified in the literature. RESULTS: Of 13,074 women (mean age 54 +/- 9.1 years) identified, patients on VT had significantly longer treatment duration compared with patients on VC (149.1 +/- 101.1 days vs. 91.6 +/- 30.0 days, p < 0.01). Among 5,599 patients receiving multiple prescriptions, higher treatment durations were observed for both VT-treated and VC-treated patients (198.5 +/- 82.4 days vs. 177.1 +/- 86.7 days, p < 0.01) compared with 165 days observed in clinical trials. Medication adherence (MPR > or = 80%) was significantly higher among VT users compared with VC users (74% +/- 27% vs. 52% +/- 32%], p < 0.01); OR, 3.24, 95% CI 2.84-3.70). CONCLUSIONS: Duration of VET among patients receiving multiple prescriptions was longer in real-world clinical practice than in clinical trials. Newly treated patients initiating VT were more likely to continue treatment for longer periods and exhibited greater medication adherence than did those on VC.

Direct treatment cost of atrial fibrillation in the elderly American population: a Medicare perspective.

OBJECTIVE: Although atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most commonly sustained arrhythmia in adults, few studies have examined the direct treatment cost of AF. METHODS: A Medicare database of a 5% random national sample of all beneficiaries was used to identify patients diagnosed with AF in 2003 and to follow them for 1 year after diagnosis. These patients were matched on a 1:1 basis by age, gender and race. The incremental cost of treating AF was calculated with multivariate regression models adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: In total, 55,260 subjects developed new AF, of which 69% were >or=75 years old, 54% were female and 91% were White. The adjusted mean incremental treatment cost of AF was $14,199 (95% confidence interval $13,201-15,001; p<0.01). Some of this cost was attributable to the incidence of stroke and heart failure at the 1-year post-AF diagnosis. A significantly higher proportion of AF patients experienced stroke (23.1 vs. 13.3%; p<0.01) and heart failure (36.7 vs. 10.4%; p<0.01) compared with Medicare beneficiaries without AF. CONCLUSIONS: Mean incremental direct treatment costs for Medicare beneficiaries with AF were higher than previously reported. Interventions that can reduce the incidence of AF and its complications may also reduce the national economic impact of AF.

Cost-savings for biosimilars in the United States: a theoretical framework and budget impact case study application using filgrastim.

BACKGROUND: Biosimilars can directly reduce the cost of treating patients for whom a reference biologic is indicated by offering a highly similar, lower priced alternative. We examine factors related to biosimilar regulatory approval, uptake, pricing, and financing and the potential impact on drug expenditures in the U.S. METHODS: We developed a framework to illustrate how key factors including regulatory policies, provider and patient perception, pricing, and payer policies impact biosimilar cost-savings. Further, we developed a budget impact cost model to estimate savings from filgrastim biosimilars under various scenarios. The model uses publicly available data on disease incidence, treatment patterns, market share, and drug prices to estimate the cost-savings over a 5-year time horizon. RESULTS: We estimate five-year cost savings of $256 million, of which 18% ($47 million) are from reduced patient out-of-pocket costs, 34% ($86 million) are savings to commercial payers, and 48% ($123 million) are savings for Medicare. Additional scenarios demonstrate the impact of uncertain factors, including price, uptake, and financing policies. CONCLUSIONS: A variety or interrelated factors influence the development, uptake, and cost-savings for Biosimilars use in the U.S. The filgrastim case is a useful example that illustrates these factors and the potential magnitude of costs savings.

Clinical Outcomes of Treatment with Filgrastim Versus a Filgrastim Biosimilar and Febrile Neutropenia-Associated Costs Among Patients with Nonmyeloid Cancer Undergoing Chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors such as filgrastim are used to decrease the incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN) among patients with nonmyeloid cancers undergoing chemotherapy treatment. Although the biosimilar filgrastim-sndz has been approved in the United States since 2015, limited real-world comparisons of filgrastim-sndz versus reference filgrastim (filgrastim-ref) have been conducted. OBJECTIVE: To compare FN incidence and assess overall FN-related health care resource utilization and medical costs among U.S. patients with non-myeloid cancer who received filgrastim-sndz or filgrastim-ref during their first chemotherapy cycle. METHODS: This was a retrospective claims analysis of patients with non-myeloid cancer who were enrolled in commercial or Medicare Advantage insurance plans from March 2015 through June 2016 and received filgrastim-sndz or filgrastim-ref during their first observed chemotherapy cycle. Patients with evidence of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation or pregnancy and those with missing demographic information were excluded. FN was defined on the basis of diagnosis codes for neutropenia and fever (N/F); neutropenia and infection (N/I); and neutropenia, infection, and fever (N/I/F). Cohorts were adjusted for differences in baseline patient characteristics using the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method, and equivalence testing was used to compare the proportion of patients who developed FN between weighted cohorts. On the basis of the range of neutropenic fever incidence found in the PIONEER clinical trial, FN incidence was considered equivalent if 90% CIs for between-cohort differences were within ± 6%. Mean FN-related health care resource utilization and total FN-related medical costs were calculated for the overall study population. RESULTS: A total of 3,542 patients were included in the study (172 filgrastim-sndz; 3,370 filgrastim-ref; mean ages 62.1 years and 64.7 years, respectively). After IPTW, there were 162 patients in the filgrastim-sndz cohort and 3,297 in the filgrastim-ref cohort (mean age 64.5 years for both). FN incidence in the weighted filgrastim-sndz versus filgrastim-ref cohorts, respectively, was 1.4% versus 0.9% for N/F, 2.3% versus 1.7% for N/I, and 0.0% versus 0.3% for N/I/F; FN incidence was statistically equivalent between treatment cohorts. Among patients in either treatment cohort who developed FN, the proportion with FN-related inpatient stays during the first chemotherapy cycle ranged from 35.0% for N/I to 70.0% for N/I/F. Mean (SD) FN-related total medical costs across all patients who developed FN were $11,977 ($18,383) for N/F, $8,040 ($14,809) for N/I, and $21,733 ($30,003) for N/I/F, in 2015 U.S. dollars. For all 3 definitions of FN, the largest proportions (73.5%-93.4%) of medical costs were inpatient related. CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world study of patients with nonmyeloid cancers undergoing chemotherapy, the incidence of FN was statistically equivalent between individuals treated with filgrastim-sndz versus filgrastim-ref during their first chemotherapy cycle. FN-related health care resource utilization and medical costs among patients who developed FN were substantial. DISCLOSURES: This work was funded by Sandoz, which participated in the study design, data interpretation, writing and revision of the manuscript, and decision to submit the manuscript for publication. Balu and Campbell are employees of Sandoz, which is the manufacturer of the filgrastim biosimilars Zarzio and Zarxio. DeLeon was an employee of Sandoz at the time this study was conducted. Lal, Brekke, Elliott, and Korrer are employees of Optum, which was contracted by Sandoz to conduct this study.

Incidence of febrile neutropenia during chemotherapy among patients with nonmyeloid cancer receiving filgrastim vs a filgrastim biosimilar.

BACKGROUND: Filgrastim and other granulocyte colony-stimulating factors are recommended to decrease febrile neutropenia (FN) incidence among patients with nonmyeloid cancers undergoing chemotherapy. Data comparing biosimilar filgrastim-sndz with reference filgrastim (filgrastim-ref) are limited outside of clinical trials in the US. OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence of FN across chemotherapy cycles 1-6 between patients treated with filgrastim-sndz vs filgrastim-ref. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective claims analysis of patients with nonmyeloid cancer enrolled in commercial or Medicare Advantage plans from March 2015 to June 2016 and receiving filgrastim-sndz or filgrastim-ref during ≥1 completed chemotherapy cycle. Patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, pregnant patients, and those with missing data were excluded. FN was identified using the diagnosis codes for neutropenia + fever, neutropenia + bacterial/fungal infection, and neutropenia + infection + fever. Equivalence testing for FN incidence at the cycle level across chemotherapy cycles 1-6 was conducted for filgrastim-sndz vs filgrastim-ref after adjusting for baseline characteristics using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Results were considered equivalent if the 90% CIs for between-cohort differences were within ±6.0%. RESULTS: The analysis included 3,459 patients (162 filgrastim-sndz and 3,297 filgrastim-ref). Before weighting, the filgrastim-sndz cohort was younger than filgrastim-ref and had a higher proportion of men, a higher proportion with commercial insurance, and lower proportions with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor prophylaxis or metastatic cancer. After weighting, baseline characteristics were similar between cohorts. Adjusted FN incidence was equivalent for filgrastim-sndz vs filgrastim-ref, respectively: neutropenia + fever, 0.81% vs 0.61% (difference [90% CI]=0.20 [-0.57 to 1.56]); neutropenia + infection, 1.21% vs 1.33% (difference [90% CI]=-0.12 [-1.17 to 2.28]); neutropenia + infection + fever, 0.0% vs 0.14% (difference=-0.14; CI not calculated because filgrastim-sndz had 0 events). CONCLUSION: Filgrastim-sndz and filgrastim-ref are statistically equivalent for preventing FN across chemotherapy cycles 1-6 among patients with nonmyeloid cancer.

Health outcomes and economic impact of therapy conversion to a biphasic insulin analog pen among privately insured patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate claims-related treatment adherence, health care resource utilization, and associated costs of therapy conversion from an insulin vial and syringe to a premixed biphasic insulin analog pen device among privately insured patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. DESIGN: Retrospective, longitudinal, intrapatient (before and after) analysis. DATA SOURCE: PharMetrics database of medical and pharmaceutical claims from 57 commercial health plans across the United States. PATIENTS: Four hundred eighty-six adult patients with a confirmed diagnosis of type 2 diabetes who converted from an insulin analog vial and syringe (233 patients) or a human insulin vial and syringe (253 patients) to a biphasic insulin analog pen device between July 1, 2001 and December 31, 2002. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: All patients had no previous use of the pen device. Primary end points were medication possession ratio (MPR), a measure of adherence; hypoglycemic events; associations between treatment adherence and hypoglycemic events, and adherence and all-cause health care costs; and all-cause-attributable, hypoglycemia-attributable, and other diabetes-attributable costs. After conversion, MPR increased significantly from 59% to 68% (p<0.01). A significant decrease in the likelihood of experiencing a hypoglycemic event was also observed after conversion (odds ratio [OR] 0.40, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.27-0.61, p<0.05), with hypoglycemic occurrences reduced nearly two thirds among subjects with optimal adherence indicated by an MPR of 80% or greater (incidence rate ratio 0.36, 95% CI 0.11-0.76, p<0.05). Significant decreases in hypoglycemia-attributable emergency department visits (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.16-0.84, p<0.05) and physician visits (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.20-0.77, p<0.05) were observed. Total mean all-cause annual treatment costs were reduced by $1748/patient (p<0.01), hypoglycemia-attributable costs were reduced by $908/patient (p<0.01), and other diabetes-attributable costs were reduced by $643/patient (p<0.01). Patients with an MPR of 80% or greater were associated with significant reductions in all-cause health care costs (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.31-0.80, p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Privately insured patients with type 2 diabetes may exhibit considerable improvements in clinical and economic outcomes after insulin therapy conversion from vial and syringe to a premixed biphasic insulin analog pen device.

Incremental treatment expenditure of diabetes in the United States.

The 2004 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, a national probability sample survey of the civilian noninstitutionalized U.S. population, analyzed incremental direct expenditures of treating diabetes in the United States. Patients with diabetes were identified as those with a medical diagnosis for diabetes based on International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, codes, as well as those who consumed diabetes-related medical care services, self-reported being diagnosed with diabetes by their physician, and were prescribed an antidiabetic medication. Incremental expenditure of treating diabetes was estimated through least squares regression. Sample estimates projected to the population indicated that approximately 4.4% of individuals aged 18 years and older in the ambulatory population have diabetes. Total incremental annual direct expenditures for patients with diabetes were estimated to be more than $82.0 billion in 2004. Diabetes expenditures represent a significant amount of health care resource utilization.

Cost-efficiency analyses for the US of biosimilar filgrastim-sndz, reference filgrastim, pegfilgrastim, and pegfilgrastim with on-body injector in the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced (febrile) neutropenia.

AIMS: Guidelines recommend prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for chemotherapy-induced (febrile) neutropenia (CIN/FN) based on regimen myelotoxicity and patient-related risk factors. The aim was to conduct a cost-efficiency analysis for the US of the direct acquisition and administration costs of the recently approved biosimilar filgrastim-sndz (Zarxio EP2006) with reference to filgrastim (Neupogen), pegfilgrastim (Neulasta), and a pegfilgrastim injection device (Neulasta Onpro; hereafter pegfilgrastim-injector) for CIN/FN prophylaxis. METHODS: A cost-efficiency analysis of the prophylaxis of one patient during one chemotherapy cycle under 1-14 days' time horizon was conducted using the unit dose average selling price (ASP) and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for subcutaneous prophylactic injection under four scenarios: cost of medication only (COSTMED), patient self-administration (SELFADMIN), healthcare provider (HCP) initiating administration followed by self-administration (HCPSTART), and HCP providing full administration (HCPALL). Two case studies were created to illustrate real-world clinical implications. The analyses were replicated using wholesale acquisition cost (WAC). RESULTS: Using ASP + CPT, cost savings achieved with filgrastim-sndz relative to reference filgrastim ranged from $65 (1 day) to $916 (14 days) across all scenarios. Relative to pegfilgrastim, savings with filgrastim-sndz ranged from $834 (14 days) up to $3,666 (1 day) under the COSTMED, SELFADMIN, and HPOSTART scenarios; and from $284 (14 days) up to $3,666 (1 day) under the HPOALL scenario. Similar to the cost-savings compared to pegfilgrastim, filgrastim-sndz achieved savings relative to pegfilgrastim-injector: from $834 (14 days) to $3,666 (1 day) under the COSTMED scenario, from $859 (14 days) to $3,692 (1 day) under SELFADMIN, from $817 (14 days) to $3,649 (1 day) under HPOSTART, and from $267 (14 days) to $3,649 (1 day) under HPOALL. Cost savings of filgrastim-sndz using WAC + CPT were even greater under all scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylaxis with filgrastim-sndz, a biosimilar filgrastim, was associated consistently with significant cost-savings over prophylaxis with reference filgrastim, pegfilgrastim, and pegfilgrastim-injector, and this across various administration scenarios.

Incremental expenditure of treating hypertension in the United States.

BACKGROUND: This study determined incremental direct expenditures of treating hypertension in the United States population. METHODS: Analysis of the 2001 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), a national probability sample survey of the civilian noninstitutionalized U.S. population, was conducted. Hypertensive patients were identified as those with a medical diagnosis for hypertension based on International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 codes; patients who were consumers of hypertension-related medical care services including inpatient and outpatient visits, emergency room visits, home health visits, office-based medical provider visits, and other medical expenses; patients who self-reported being diagnosed with hypertension by their physicians; and patients who were prescribed antihypertensive medication. Incremental expenditure of treating hypertension was estimated through least-squares regression adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity, education, and comorbidities using the D'Hoore et al version of the Charlson comorbidity index. Sample data were projected to the U.S. population and 95% confidence limits for estimates were calculated using the Taylor expansion method. RESULTS: Sample estimates projected to the population indicated that approximately 17.4% of individuals >or=18 years of age in the ambulatory population have hypertension. Total incremental annual direct expenditures for hypertension patients were estimated to be more than 54.0 billion US dollars in 2001 after adjusting for demographics and comorbidities. Mean incremental annual direct expenditures for an individual with hypertension was 1,131 US dollars . Prescription medicines, inpatient visits, and outpatient visits constituted >90% of overall incremental expenditures. CONCLUSIONS: With incremental direct medical expenditures estimated at nearly 55.0 billion US dollars, hypertension expenditures represent a significant amount of health care resource use.

Medication adherence and the associated health-economic impact among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus converting to insulin pen therapy: an analysis of third-party managed care claims data.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the impact on adherence, hypoglycemic events, resource utilization, and the associated health care costs of converting from administration of insulin therapy by a vial/syringe to an insulin analogue pen device in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: This pre-post analysis used an integrated medical and pharmacy claims database containing information for >40 million covered lives from 57 managed care health plans in the United States. Adults with a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes whose treatment was converted from conventional human or analogue insulin injection (vial/syringe) to a prefilled insulin analogue pen from July 2001 through December 2002, with no use of an insulin analogue pen device in the preceding 6 months, were identified and analyzed retrospectively. The primary end points were adherence (as measured by a medication possession ratio [MPR] > or =80%); the odds ratio (OR) for hypoglycemic events requiring health care resource utilization and resulting in a claim; the association between adherence and hypoglycemic events; and all-cause, hypoglycemia-attributable (HA), and diabetes-attributable (DA) health care costs. RESULTS: A total of 1156 subjects were identified and analyzed (mean [SD] age, 45.4 [13.7] years; 53.8% male; previous insulin vial use: 595 [51.5%] human, 561 [48.5%] analogue). Medication adherence was significantly improved after conversion to the insulin pen device (from 62% to 69%; P < 0.01). The proportion of subjects considered adherent was significantly higher in the period after the conversion compared with before the conversion (54.6% vs 36.1%, respectively; P < 0.01). The likelihood of experiencing a hypoglycemic event was significantly reduced after conversion (OR = 0.50; 95% CI, 0.37-0.68; P < 0.05), and the incidence of hypoglycemia in subjects with an MPR > or =80% decreased by nearly two thirds (incident rate ratio = 0.35; 95% CI, 0.11-0.81; P < 0.05). There were significant decreases in HA emergency department visits (OR = 0.44; 95% CI, 0.21-0.92; P < 0.05) and physician visits (OR = 0.39; 95% CI, 0.24-0.64; P < 0.05), whereas HA-related hospitalizations and outpatient visits remained similar after conversion. Total mean all-cause annual treatment costs were reduced by $1590 per patient (from $16,359 to $14,769; P < 0.01). Annual HA costs were reduced by $788 per patient (from $1415 to $627; P < 0.01), predominantly as a result of decreased hospitalization costs (from $857 to $288; P < 0.01). Annual DA costs were reduced by $600 per patient (from $8827 to $8227; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Among these patients with type 2 diabetes treated in a managed care setting, a switch from administration of insulin therapy by vial/syringe to a prefilled insulin analogue pen device was associated with improved medication adherence, fewer claims for hypoglycemic events, reduced emergency department and physician visits, and lower annual treatment costs.

Prevalence and economic consequences of medication adherence in diabetes: a systematic literature review.

A systematic literature review was conducted using a comprehensive list of relevant search terms (1990-2005) to identify studies on adherence among patients with diabetes, and its economic effect. A lack of adequate treatment adherence (36%-87%) among patients with diabetes was confirmed, primarily measured by medication possession ratio (MPR). Adherence varied among oral agent-only (36%-87%) versus concomitant or insulin-only (54%-81%) regimens. Economic consequences of adherence were a decrease in health care costs, ranging from 8.6% to 28.9%, with an approximate 10% increase in MPR, mostly in the form of a 4.1% to 31.0% decrease in hospitalization. Increased cost sharing was associated with a 9% to 23% decline in medication use.