Treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization and costs of HER2-negative gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer.

Aim: To describe treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization and costs in HER2-negative gastric/gastroesophageal (G/GEJ) cancer in the USA. Methods: Retrospective IQVIA Adjudicated Closed Claims database analysis; patients with HER2-negative G/GEJ cancer initiating systemic therapy between October 2016 and December 2019 were identified. Results: Among 1317 patients, platinum plus taxane regimens (54%) were common in neoadjuvant/adjuvant settings. Platinum-taxane (41%) and platinum-fluoropyrimidine (36%) regimens were common first-line therapies in the metastatic setting. Treatment regimens were heterogeneous in later lines. Hospitalization rates ranged from 39% (first-, second-line metastatic settings) to 61% (neoadjuvant/adjuvant setting). High healthcare resource utilization was driven by high outpatient costs. Mean per-patient per-month outpatient costs combining physician office and hospital visits ranged from US$10,944 to $12,582 (representing 52-70% of total costs). Conclusion: For G/GEJ cancer, systemic regimens varied across lines of therapy with variation increasing with subsequent therapy lines; high healthcare costs persist for systemic treatment, particularly outpatient services.

Real-world use, dose intensity, and adherence to enfortumab vedotin in locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer.

BACKGROUND: Enfortumab vedotin (EV) monotherapy is approved for the treatment of advanced urothelial cancer as later-line therapy (post-immunotherapy and -platinum-chemotherapy) and as earlier-line therapy (cisplatin-ineligible, at least 1 prior therapy). We examined real-world EV monotherapy use, dose intensity and adherence across 280 US cancer clinics. METHODS: This postmarketing study used data from a nationwide (United States) deidentified patient-level electronic health record-derived database. Included were patients with advanced urothelial cancer initiating EV on or after December 19, 2019 (date of accelerated approval). We summarized characteristics of EV users using descriptive statistics and computed metrics of EV use, EV dose intensity, and EV treatment adherence. RESULTS: We identified 416 advanced urothelial cancer patients initiating EV monotherapy. More than half of patients (55.3%) received EV as later-line therapy (3L+), and nearly half (44.7%) received EV as earlier line therapy (1 or 2L). Dosing frequency (mean [SD] 2.4 [0.5] treatments per 28 day cycle) and dose (1.1 [0.2] mg/kg) were lower than label indication guidelines (1.25 mg/kg, Day 1, 8, 15 of a 28 day cycle). Only 58.8% of patients received an average of >2 treatments per 28-day cycle. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with advanced urothelial cancer treated with EV monotherapy in contemporary practice, EV dosing frequency, and dosage was lower in clinical practice than recommended in the product labeling. Further research is required to understand clinical factors and outcomes associated with the differences observed.

Health care resource utilization, quality metrics, and costs of bladder cancer within the Oncology Care Model.

OBJECTIVES: New and emerging therapies have significantly changed the bladder cancer (BC) treatment landscape and can potentially affect spending and patient care in CMS' Oncology Care Model (OCM), a service delivery and payment model for voluntarily participating practices. The objectives of this analysis were to estimate health care resource utilization (HCRU) and benchmark spending per OCM episode of BC, and to model spending drivers and quality metrics. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of OCM episodes triggered by receipt of anticancer therapy among Medicare beneficiaries from 2016 to 2018. Based on this, an average performance estimation was conducted to assess the impact of hypothetical changes in novel therapy use by OCM practices. RESULTS: BC accounted for approximately 3% (n = 60,099) of identified OCM episodes. Relative to low-risk episodes, high-risk episodes were associated with greater HCRU and worse OCM quality metrics. Mean spending per high-risk episode was $37,857 (low-risk episode: $9204), with $11,051 spent on systemic therapies and $7158 on inpatient services. In the estimation, high- and low-risk BC exceeded the spending target by 1.7% and 9.4%, respectively. This did not affect payments to practices and no retrospective payments were necessary. CONCLUSIONS: As 3% of OCM episodes were attributed to BC, with only one-third classified as high-risk, controlling expenditure on novel therapies for advanced BC is unlikely to affect overall practice performance. The average performance estimation further emphasized the minimal impact that novel therapy spending in high-risk BC has on OCM payments to practices.

Treatment with opioids in patients with locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma and matched non-cancer controls.

BACKGROUND: Locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) is an aggressive disease with a poor long-term survival. While patients frequently report pain, there are limited data on the patient experience with pain and pain medication use. This study used real-world data to quantify treatment with opioids, as a proxy for pain, in patients with la/mUC compared with matched non-cancer controls. METHODS: This was a retrospective claims analysis, using the IBM® MarketScan® databases, of adults diagnosed with urothelial carcinoma and initiating ≥1 la/mUC therapy between May 2016 and June 2019. Index date was date of first systemic therapy claim for la/mUC; baseline was the 6 months pre-index; follow-up was from index until disenrollment or study end. Proportion with treatment with opioids, number of opioid prescriptions, and daily morphine-equivalent dose (MEQ; in morphine milligram equivalents/day) in patients with la/mUC and matched non-cancer controls from the same databases were assessed. RESULTS: We identified 1293 patients with la/mUC and matched 1:3 with 3862 non-cancer controls. Mean (SD) follow-up was 1.26 (0.74) years in patients with la/mUC and 1.29 (0.72) years in controls. A greater proportion of patients with la/mUC, compared with controls, used opioids during both baseline (63.6% vs. 19.4%) and follow-up (61.4% vs. 27.9%). Among those who used opioids, mean monthly prescriptions (number of medications claims/patient/month) were 0.55 both in patients with la/mUC and controls during baseline, and 0.49 and 0.39, respectively, at follow-up. Daily MEQ among those who used opioids was 53.6 and 45.7 during baseline, and 74.7 and 40.8 at follow-up, in patients with la/mUC and controls, respectively. In patients with la/mUC, mean opioid prescriptions and daily MEQ increased during later lines of therapy. CONCLUSION: In patients with la/mUC, pain requiring opioids is common at diagnosis, worsens as the patient progresses, and is consistently higher than in matched controls. Improvement in disease control with more effective therapies may reduce cancer pain in this population.

Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma Following Discontinuation of PD-1/L1 Inhibitor Therapy.

INTRODUCTION: The patterns of care and attrition of locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (la/mUC) patients eligible for systemic therapy following PD-1/L1 inhibitors are unclear. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical characteristics and treatment patterns among patients with la/mUC following discontinuation of first-line (1L) or second-line (2L) PD-1/L1 inhibitor therapy. METHODS: An ambispective, multisite, chart review study was conducted in the United States, including patients with la/mUC. Eligible patients had initiated and subsequently discontinued PD-1/L1 therapy in the 1L or 2L setting for la/mUC between May 2016 and July 2018; with follow-up through October 2019. Patient characteristics, treatments, and overall survival (OS) were described. Patients had the option to complete a 1-time patient reported outcomes (PRO) survey. RESULTS: Among 300 patients included in the chart review, 198 (66%) received 1L PD-1/L1 inhibitor and 102 (34%) received 2L PD-1/L1 inhibitor. Following discontinuation of PD-1/L1 inhibitor therapy, 34% (n = 68) received subsequent therapy in 2L and 29% (n = 30) in third-line (3L). The median OS post-1L PD-1/L1 inhibitor was 9.4 (95% CI 8.6-NA) and 2.5 months (95% CI 2.24-3.50) for those who received and did not receive subsequent therapy, respectively. Following 2L PD-1/L1 inhibitor discontinuation, the median OS was 5.7 (95% CI 5.1-7.8) and 3.98 (95% CI 3.29-4.87) months for those who received and did not receive subsequent therapy, respectively. Among those with PRO data, 64% reported experiencing cancer-related pain and 29.6% received an opioid. Only 12.7% reported having a caregiver, requiring approximately 13 h/d of service. CONCLUSION: The symptom and caregiver burden are high among real-world patients with la/mUC who discontinued 1L or 2L PD-1/L1 inhibitors and outcomes are dismal, with a minority receiving subsequent therapy. Patterns of care in the setting of 1L maintenance avelumab and novel agents require further investigation.

Increased Healthcare Resource Utilization and Direct and Indirect Costs in Patients with Depression and Comorbid Overactive Bladder: Evidence From a Retrospective, Matched Case-Control Cohort Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: This study sought to compare healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), costs, and workplace productivity among patients with depression, with and without overactive bladder (OAB). METHODS: This retrospective, case-control cohort analysis compares HCRU, costs, and workplace productivity among propensity score matched patients with depression and OAB (case cohort) and patients with depression without OAB (control cohort). Patients were aged 18 years or older, insured/on Medicare, and had diagnosed depression and an antidepressant medication claim pre index. First OAB-related event was index for cases; controls were assigned a proxy (study period 12 months). Comparisons of HCRU and costs and regression models assessed the relationship between OAB and costs. For the workplace productivity subset analyses cases and controls were balanced on baseline covariates for the short-term disability analyses but as they were unbalanced for the absentee analyses, multivariate regression analyses were used for this subset. RESULTS: The study criteria were met by 39,085 cases and 308,736 controls, from which, 37,997 patients were successfully matched 1:1 (mean age 55 years; 81% female). Most depression-related HCRU measures were similar across cohorts; however, outpatient visits, ER visits, and number of unique depression medications were significantly higher (all p < 0.05) among cases. Cases also had 13% higher total depression-related costs (p < 0.0001). Total mean (standard deviation [SD]) depression-related costs were $1796 ($4235) for cases versus $1597 ($3863) for controls (p < 0.0001). For workplace productivity (absentee data: cases [n = 686], controls [n = 642]; short-term disability data: cases [n = 4395], controls [n = 4433]) absentee outcomes were similar across cohorts. However, a higher percentage of cases used short-term disability benefits compared to controls (21.3% versus 16.9%; p < 0.0001) and cases experienced more case days (11.0 versus 8.6 mean days) and received higher mean payments than controls ($1226 versus $1033; p < 0.0001) in this subset. CONCLUSIONS: OAB was associated with 13% higher depression-related costs and 4.4% more cases used short-term disability benefits.

Direct Costs Incurred Among Women Undergoing Surgical Procedures to Treat Uterine Fibroids.

BACKGROUND: Uterine fibroids (UF) affect up to 70%-80% of women by 50 years of age and represent a substantial economic burden on patients and society. Despite the high costs associated with UF, recent studies on the costs of UF-related surgical treatments remain limited. OBJECTIVE: To describe the health care resource utilization (HCRU) and all-cause costs among women diagnosed with UF who underwent UF-related surgery. METHODS: Data from the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters database and Medicaid Multi-State database were independently, retrospectively analyzed from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2015. Women aged 18-64 years with ≥ 1 UF claim from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2014, a claim for a UF-related surgery (hysterectomy, myomectomy, uterine artery embolization [UAE], or ablation) from January 1, 2010, to November 30, 2015, and continuous enrollment for ≥ 1 year presurgery and ≥ 30 days postsurgery qualified for study inclusion. A 1-year period before the date of the first UF-related surgical claim after the first UF diagnosis was used to report baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. Surgery characteristics were reported. All-cause HCRU and costs (adjusted to 2017 U.S. dollars) were described by the 14 days pre-, peri-, and 30 days postoperative periods, and independently by the inpatient or outpatient setting. RESULTS: Overall, 113,091 patients were included in this study: commercial database, n = 103,814; Medicaid database, n = 9,277. Median time from the initial UF diagnosis to first UF-related surgical procedure was 33 days for the commercial population and 47 days for the Medicaid population. Hysterectomy was the most common UF-related surgery received after UF diagnosis (commercial, 68% [n = 70,235]; Medicaid, 75% [n = 6,928]). In both populations, 97% of patients had ≥ 1 outpatient visit from 14 days presurgery to 30 days postsurgery (commercial, n = 100,402; Medicaid, n = 9,023), and the majority of all UF-related surgeries occurred in the outpatient setting (commercial, 64% [n = 66,228]; Medicaid, 66% [n = 6,090]). Mean total all-cause costs for patients with UF who underwent any UF-related surgery were $15,813 (SD $13,804) in the commercial population (n = 95,433) and $11,493 (SD $26,724) in the Medicaid population (n = 4,785). Mean total all-cause costs for UF-related surgeries for the commercial/Medicaid populations were $17,450 (SD $13,483)/$12,273 (SD $19,637) for hysterectomy, $14,216 (SD $16,382)/$11,764 (SD $15,478) for myomectomy, $17,163 (SD $13,527)/$12,543 (SD $23,777) for UAE, $8,757 (SD $9,369)/$7,622 (SD $50,750) for ablation, and $12,281 (SD $10,080)/$5,989 (SD $5,617) for myomectomy and ablation. Mean total all-cause costs for any UF-related surgery performed in the outpatient setting in the commercial and Medicaid populations were $14,396 (SD $11,466) and $6,720 (SD $10,374), respectively, whereas costs in the inpatient setting were $18,345 (SD $16,910) and $21,805 (SD $43,244), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis indicated that surgical treatment options for UF continue to represent a substantial financial burden. This underscores the need for alternative, cost-effective treatments for the management of UF. DISCLOSURES: This study was sponsored by Allergan, Dublin, Ireland. Allergan played a role in the conduct, analysis, interpretation, writing of the report, and decision to publish this study. Harrington and Ye are employees of Allergan. Stafkey-Mailey, Fuldeore, and Yue are employees of Xcenda. Ta was a contractor at Allergan at the time the study was conducted and is currently supported by a training grant from Allergan. Bonine, Shih, and Gillard are employees of Allergan and have stock, stock options, and/or restricted stock units as employees of Allergan. Banks has no disclosures to report. This study was presented as a poster at Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy Nexus 2017; October 16-19, 2017; Dallas, TX.

Treatment Patterns and Costs of Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy: A Claims Database Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids, plasma exchange, and intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) have been standard-of-care treatments for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) for more than 2 decades. Despite guideline recommendations for best clinical practices, heterogeneity in patient presentation and the course of treatment for CIDP remains. There is limited literature regarding the real-world treatment patterns of and costs associated with CIDP. OBJECTIVE: To analyze and describe the real-world treatment patterns of and economic burden associated with CIDP. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study evaluated the treatment patterns and CIDP-related healthcare costs over a 2-year follow-up period for patients with newly diagnosed CIDP who had commercial insurance, using claims data from the IMS LifeLink PharMetrics Plus Claims database between 2009 through 2014. Treatment-naïve patients with newly diagnosed CIDP were evaluated for 2 years postdiagnosis, which captured the treatments used and the resource utilization. The patients were defined as receiving active CIDP therapy (ie, IVIG, immunosuppressants, oral or intravenous steroids, or plasma exchange) or active surveillance. RESULTS: Of the 525 patients identified with newly diagnosed CIDP, 55.2% of patients were prescribed only steroid therapy, and 25.3% of patients were prescribed an IVIG therapy during the 2-year follow-up. The median time to the initial treatment was shortest for patients receiving plasma exchange alone (0.03 months) or in combination with a steroid (0.03 months), followed by IVIG plus another therapy (0.53 months), and then IVIG alone (0.71 months). Initiating therapy with steroids alone took the longest mean time (6.51 months) to start the treatment. The median length of time to receive therapy was longest for the steroid plus plasma exchange cohort (21.8 months), followed by the steroid plus immunosuppressant cohort (10.1 months), and the 2 IVIG cohorts (9.04 months for IVIG alone and 9.82 months for IVIG plus another therapy). The mean total CIDP-specific 2-year follow-up costs were highest for the cohort that received IVIG alone ($119,928) or with an additional therapy ($133,334) and lowest for patients who received active surveillance ($3723) or steroids alone ($3101). CONCLUSIONS: Steroid therapy was initiated later and resulted in a shorter duration of treatment than other treatment options for patients with CIDP, which may reflect diagnostic uncertainty, disease severity or remission, therapeutic challenge to determine diagnosis, or the side-effect profile of steroids. The use of steroids alone was the most common prescribed treatment for CIDP. Further research is needed to understand the rationale for treatment decisions in this patient population and their potential impact on patients and health plans.

Two comparative assessments of intravenous immunoglobulin therapy switching patterns in the treatment of chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy in the US.

Purpose: For chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) patients, each branded intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) treatment differs in production processes, virus elimination, formulation, and composition. Given the limited availability of real-world data comparing IVIGs for CIDP, this study evaluated switching patterns between IVIG products in 2 separate retrospective databases. Patients and methods: Two independent analytic teams retrospectively evaluated IVIG treatment-naïve patients with an ICD diagnosis code for CIDP. Study 1 used integrated healthcare claims from IMS LifeLink PharMetrics Plus™ and Study 2 used the Truven MarketScan® Database. All analyses were descriptive, with outcomes assessed during the 2-year post-index period. Results: One-quarter of IVIG patients switched therapies within the 2-year study period. In both studies, switching rates were lowest for IVIG-G (Gamunex®-C) (Study 1: 9.8%, Study 2: 8.9%), followed by IVIG-F (Flebogamma®) (Study 1: 25.0%, Study 2: 18.2%), and highest for IVIG-other (Octagam®/Gammaplex®) (Study 1: 50.0%, Study 2: 33.3%). When patients were switched, most switched to IVIG-G (Study 1: 51.6%, Study 2: 54.3%). Conclusion: The small proportion of CIDP switchers in 2 independent studies suggests that IVIG therapy is generally well tolerated. However, differences existed in switch rates for different IVIG products. The reason for low switching rates could not be assessed in this study; therefore, further studies are required to detect possible relevant differences in effectiveness and tolerability.

Healthcare resource utilization and costs among women diagnosed with uterine fibroids compared to women without uterine fibroids.

Objective: To perform a retrospective, matched-cohort, longitudinal evaluation of annual pre- and post-diagnosis costs incurred among women with uterine fibroids (UF) (cases) compared to controls without UF. Methods: Data were derived from the IBM Watson Health MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters and Medicaid Multi-State databases. Women aged 18-64 years with ≥1 inpatient or outpatient medical claim with an initial UF diagnosis (index date) from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2014 were included. Healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) data including pharmacy, outpatient and inpatient hospital claims were collected for 1 year pre-index and ≤5 years post-index. All-cause costs (adjusted to 2017 $US) were compared between cases and controls using multivariable regression models. Results: Analysis included 205,098 (Commercial) and 24,755 (Medicaid) case-control pairs. HCRU and total all-cause healthcare costs were higher for cases versus controls during the pre-index year and all years post-index. Total unadjusted mean all-cause costs were $1197 higher (p < .0001; Commercial) and $2813 higher (standardized difference 0.08; Medicaid) for cases during the pre-index year. Total adjusted mean all-cause costs in the first year post-index were $14,917 for cases versus $5717 for controls in the Commercial population, and $20,244 versus $10,544, respectively, in the Medicaid population. In Years 2-5 post-index, incremental mean adjusted total costs decreased, but remained significantly higher for cases versus controls at all time points in both populations (all p < .05). Conclusions: Costs were higher for women with UF compared to women without UF during the pre-index year and over 5 years post-index; differences were greatest in the first year post-index.

Long-term opioid users with chronic noncancer pain: Assessment of opioid abuse risk and relationship with healthcare resource use.

OBJECTIVE: Identify opioid abuse risk factors among chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) patients receiving long-term opioid therapy and assess healthcare resource use (HRU) among patients at elevated abuse risk. DESIGN: Data were obtained from an integrated administrative claims database. Classification and Regression Tree (CART) analysis identified risk factors potentially predictive of opioid abuse, which were used to classify the overall population into cohorts defined by levels of abuse risk. Multivariable logistic regression compared HRU across risk cohorts. SETTING: Retrospective cohort study. PATIENTS, PARTICIPANTS: 21,072 patients aged ≥18 years diagnosed with ≥1 of 5 types of CNCP and a prescription for Schedule II or III/IV opioid medication used long-term (≥90 days). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Opioid abuse risk factors; (2) HRU differences between risk cohorts. RESULTS: CART analysis identified four groups at elevated opioid abuse risk defined by three factors (age, daily opioid dose, and total days' supply of opioids); sensitivity: 70.3 percent, specificity: 74.1 percent, and positive predictive value: 5.6 percent. The analysis results were used to classify patients into low-risk (72.5 percent), at-risk (25.4 percent), and opioid-abuser (2.2 percent) cohorts. In multivariable analysis, emergency department (ED) use was higher among at-risk vs low-risk patients (odds ratio [OR]: 1.14; p<0.05); hospitalization and ED visits were higher for opioid-abusers vs low-risk patients (OR: 2.33 and 2.14, respectively; p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies a subpopulation of CNCP patients at risk of opioid abuse. However, limited sensitivity and specificity of criteria defining this subpopulation reinforce the importance of physician discretion in patient-level treatment decisions.