Real-World Treatment Patterns, Resource Use and Costs in Adult Patients With Atopic Dermatitis Receiving Systemic Treatment: Derma-Atopic Study in Spain. / [Artículo traducido] Características de los pacientes, patrones de tratamiento, uso de recursos y costes en adultos con dermatitis atópica moderada-grave en la práctica habitual en España: Estudio Derma-Atopic.

BACKGROUND: Moderate-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) has a significant impact on patients' lives, with many requiring systemic treatment to manage symptoms (e.g., pruritus). Several drugs are used off-label to treat AD. This study describes sociodemographic/clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, health resource use (HRU) and costs in adults with AD who initiated systemic treatment or phototherapy in routine practice. METHODS: This retrospective observational study of electronic medical records in the BIG-PAC database identified adults with prior diagnosis of AD (ICD-9: 691.8 or 692.9) starting oral corticosteroids, immunosuppressants, biologics or phototherapy between 01/01/2012 and 31/12/2016. Patients were followed for 3 years from treatment initiation, up to 31/12/2019. Data on patient characteristics, treatment patterns, HRU and costs were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: Patients (N = 1995) had a mean age of 60 years, 64% were female, with a mean time of 23 years since diagnosis (84% were ≥18 years at AD onset). Main comorbidities were anxiety (38%), arterial hypertension (36%) and dyslipidemia (35%). Most patients used oral corticosteroids as first systemic (84%; median duration 29 days) and immunosuppressants in 13% of patients (median duration 117 days, 5% cyclosporine and 4% methotrexate). Half of patients required a second line systemic and 12% a third line. The use of immunosuppressants and biologics increased with treatment lines. About 13% of patients received systemic treatments continuously over the 3-year follow-up. The average 3-year per patient cost was 3835 euros, with an average annual cost of 1278 euros. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest a high comorbidity and economic burden in this real-world adult population with AD, and the need for systemic treatments indicated for use in AD.

Real-World Treatment Patterns, Resource Use and Costs in Adult Patients With Atopic Dermatitis Receiving Systemic Treatment: Derma-Atopic Study in Spain.

BACKGROUND: Moderate-severe atopic dermatitis (AD) has a significant impact on patients' lives, with many requiring systemic treatment to manage symptoms (e.g., pruritus). Several drugs are used off-label to treat AD. This study describes sociodemographic/clinical characteristics, treatment patterns, health resource use (HRU) and costs in adults with AD who initiated systemic treatment or phototherapy in routine practice. METHODS: This retrospective observational study of electronic medical records in the BIG-PAC database identified adults with prior diagnosis of AD (ICD-9: 691.8 or 692.9) starting oral corticosteroids, immunosuppressants, biologics or phototherapy between 01/01/2012 and 31/12/2016. Patients were followed for 3 years from treatment initiation, up to 31/12/2019. Data on patient characteristics, treatment patterns, HRU and costs were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: Patients (N=1995) had a mean age of 60 years, 64% were female, with a mean time of 23 years since diagnosis (84% were ≥18 years at AD onset). Main comorbidities were anxiety (38%), arterial hypertension (36%) and dyslipidemia (35%). Most patients used oral corticosteroids as first systemic (84%; median duration 29 days) and immunosuppressants in 13% of patients (median duration 117 days, 5% cyclosporine and 4% methotrexate). Half of patients required a second line systemic and 12% a third line. The use of immunosuppressants and biologics increased with treatment lines. About 13% of patients received systemic treatments continuously over the 3-year follow-up. The average 3-year per patient cost was 3835 euros, with an average annual cost of 1278 euros. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest a high comorbidity and economic burden in this real-world adult population with AD, and the need for systemic treatments indicated for use in AD.

[Budget impact of growth hormone treatment during the transition phase between childhood and adulthood]. / Impacto presupuestario de la utilización de hormona de crecimiento de la edad pediátrica a la adulta.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the budget impact of somatrophin (Genotonorm) use in growth hormone deficiency (GHD) patients during the transition between childhood and adulthood. METHOD: A budget impact model was designed under the Spanish National Health System with a 5-year time horizon. Calculations of susceptible patients were based on disease prevalence (0.02%) applied to Spanish population. From total GHD cases, 60% was considered persistent and treatment candidates. An expert panel assumed that 20% of candidates would reject the treatment and 8% would withdraw therapy annually. Considered costs included: therapy costs, diagnosis (test and medical visit) and follow-up cost. RESULTS: There would be 49, 93, 132, 186 and 199 patients undergoing treatment each year (2010-2014). The total impact of Genotonorm use during the transition phase would be €367,691, €655,430, €1044,874, €1334,059, and €1594,670 for years 1 to 5. The average annual cost per patient would be €7506, €7059, €7903, €7960, €7995. CONCLUSIONS: GHD treatment during the transition phase in Spain poses an annual average layout of €7684/patient.

Cost-effectiveness evaluation of sunitinib as first-line targeted therapy for metastatic renal cell carcinoma in Spain.

INTRODUCTION Sunitinib, an oral, multitargeted receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, delays disease progression, with a median overall survival (OS) of more than 2 years, improves quality of life and is becoming the first-line standard of care for metastatic renal carcinoma (mRCC). PURPOSE To assess the economic value of sunitinib as fi rst-line therapy in mRCC within the Spanish healthcare system. METHODS An adapted Markov model with a 10-year time horizon was used to analyse the cost effectiveness of sunitinib vs. sorafenib (SFN) and bevacizumab/interferon-α (BEV/IFN) as first-line mRCC therapy from the Spanish third-party payer perspective. Progression-free survival (PFS) and OS data from sunitinib, SFN and BEV/IFN pivotal trials were extrapolated to project survival and costs in 6-week cycles. Results, in progression-free life-years (PFLY), life years (LY) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) gained, expressed as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) with costs and benefits discounted annually at 3%, were obtained using deterministic and probabilistic analyses. RESULTS Sunitinib was more effective and less costly than both SFN (gains of 0.52 PFLY, 0.16 LY, 0.17 QALY) and BEV/IFN (gains of 0.19 PFLY, 0.23 LY, 0.16 QALY) with average cost savings/patients of €1,124 and €23,218, respectively. Using a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of €50,000/QALY, sunitinib achieved an incremental net benefit (INB) of €9,717 and €31,211 compared with SFN and BEV/IFN, respectively. At this WTP, the probability of sunitinib providing the highest INB was 75%. CONCLUSION Our analysis suggests that sunitinib is a costeffective alternative to other targeted therapies as first-line mRCC therapy in the Spanish healthcare setting.