Costs and Treatment Patterns Among Patients with Atopic Dermatitis Using Advanced Therapies in the United States: Analysis of a Retrospective Claims Database.

INTRODUCTION: For many, atopic dermatitis (AD) is not adequately controlled with topical regimens. This analysis examined treatment using advanced therapies and associated costs. METHODS: The IQVIA Health Plan Claims data set was analyzed. Patients aged ≥ 12 years with AD who newly initiated advanced therapy after the availability of dupilumab (March 28, 2017) and had ≥ 6 months continuous enrollment before and after their first advanced therapy claim (index date) were included. Advanced therapies included dupilumab, systemic corticosteroids (SCSs), systemic immunosuppressants (SISs), and phototherapy. A multivariate regression model was used to predict annualized follow-up healthcare costs. RESULTS: In total, 1980 patients were included (61.1% female; mean age, 41.2 years [SD, 17.4]; 11.3% < 18 years). Pre-index date, 65.2% of patients used topical corticosteroids (TCSs; 40.7% and 32.1% used medium and high potency, respectively). The most common advanced therapy was SCSs (N = 1453 [73.4%]; 69.2% prednisone) followed by dupilumab (N = 265 [13.4%]), SISs (N = 99 [5.0%]; 47.5% methotrexate), and phototherapy (N = 163 [8.2%]). Of patients treated with dupilumab, SISs, and phototherapy, 17.4%, 26.3%, and 14.1%, respectively, were prescribed SCSs post-index date. Overall, 62.6% of patients initiating SCSs, 49.1% initiating dupilumab, 64.6% initiating SISs, and 36.2% initiating phototherapy were prescribed TCSs post-index date. Mean annualized total costs (SD) post-index date were $20,722 ($47,014): $11,196 ($41,549) in medical costs ($7973 [$35,133] in outpatient visit costs) and $9526 ($21,612) in pharmacy costs. Mean annualized total cost (SD) varied significantly (P < 0.05) by index treatment: dupilumab, $36,505 ($14,028); SCSs, $17,924 ($49,019); SISs, $24,762 ($47,583); phototherapy, and $17,549 ($57,238). CONCLUSIONS: Switching to combination therapy with SCSs and TCSs was common within 6 months of initiating advanced therapy in patients with AD. Patients also incurred significant pharmacy and outpatient costs. These results highlight the difficulty of managing AD with these existing treatment options.

Treatment patterns, resource use, and economic outcomes associated with atypical antipsychotic prescriptions in children and adolescents with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder in quebec.

OBJECTIVE: To assess treatment patterns, health care resource utilization (HRU), and costs among previously stimulant-treated children and adolescents with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) receiving atypical antipsychotic (AAP) prescriptions in Quebec. METHODS: Health care claims data extracted from Quebec's provincial health plan database between March 2007 and February 2012 were analyzed. Children and adolescents (6 to 17 years) with ADHD who were taking a stimulant and either switched to, or augmented with, an AAP (with the first AAP defined as the index AAP) without a documented diagnosis for which AAPs are Health Canada-approved were included. Discontinuation, augmentation, and switching of the index AAP during the 12-month, follow-up period were estimated using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. HRU and costs for the 6 months before (baseline period) and after initiation of the index AAP were compared. RESULTS: A total of 453 children and adolescents with ADHD, mostly male (74.6%) and aged 6 to 12 years (73.7%), met the inclusion criteria. The 12-month discontinuation, augmentation, and switching rates were 45.5%, 68.2%, and 80.7%, respectively. Patients had, on average, more all-cause prescription fills (22.2, compared with 13.3) and incurred more all-cause pharmacy ($889, compared with $710), total medical ($1096, compared with $644), and total health care ($1985, compared with $1354) costs during the 6-month study period than during the 6-month baseline period (all P < 0.05). Similarly, ADHD-related total health care costs were higher during the study period ($1269, compared with $835; P < 0.05); all-cause and ADHD-related total health care costs increased by 46.6% and 52.0%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Use of an AAP among stimulant-treated children and adolescents with ADHD in Quebec was associated with high rates of therapy changes and increased HRU and costs.

Cost effectiveness of guanfacine extended-release versus atomoxetine for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: application of a matching-adjusted indirect comparison.

BACKGROUND: About 7% of children and adolescents are diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in the US. Patients with ADHD who are intolerant of or do not have an optimal response to stimulants often use non-stimulants as alternative therapies. Guanfacine extended-release (GXR) and atomoxetine (ATX) are the only non-stimulants approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for once-daily use in the treatment of children and adolescents with ADHD in the US. ATX has been on the market since 2002 while GXR was recently approved in 2009. To date, there is no comparative effectiveness or cost-effectiveness study comparing the two drugs. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of GXR versus ATX for the treatment of ADHD in children and adolescents, using the comparative efficacy results from a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC). METHODS: The MAIC method was used to compare the efficacy between GXR (target dose and lower doses) and ATX (target dose) in the absence of head-to-head clinical trials. Individual patients in the GXR trials were weighted such that the summary baseline characteristics and the efficacy of the placebo arm of the GXR trials matched exactly with those from published ATX trials. After weighting, the efficacy (i.e. change in the ADHD rating scale, fourth edition [ADHD-RS-IV] total score from baseline) was compared between each GXR dosing group and the ATX group. The results from the MAIC analyses were used to populate a 1-year Markov model that is used to compare the cost effectiveness of GXR versus ATX from a US third-party payer perspective. Effectiveness outcomes for each treatment group were estimated as the proportion of responders, defined as patients with ≥25% reduction in ADHD-RS-IV total score from baseline, and average quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Utilities associated with response/non-response and disutilities due to adverse events were applied in the model. Costs included drug and medical service costs and were inflated to 2011 US dollars ($US). Incremental cost/QALY and incremental cost/responder were estimated. Univariate sensitivity analyses were conducted by varying all model parameters, including costs, utilities, and response rate. RESULTS: The target dose of GXR was 0.12 mg/kg/day. In match-adjusted populations with balanced baseline characteristics, patients receiving GXR at the dose of 0.09-0.12(p = 0.0016) [DOSAGE ERROR CORRECTED] and 0.075-0.09 mg/kg/day (p = 0.0248) had better efficacy, while those receiving GXR at the dose of 0.046-0.075 mg/kg/day had comparable efficacy (p = 0.0699), compared with patients receiving ATX at the target dose of 1.2 mg/kg/day. In the base case of the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), GXR had incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $US10 637/QALY and $US853/responder, compared with ATX (incremental costs: $US74; incremental effectiveness: 0.007 QALYs and 86 responders per 1000 patients treated). Results of all univariate sensitivity analyses showed that the model results were robust to changes in model inputs. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first application of the novel comparative efficacy method of MAIC to a CEA model. The MAIC results indicate that GXR (0.075-0.12 mg/kg/day) was more effective than ATX (1.2 mg/kg/day) in the trial population. The CEA results indicate that GXR is cost effective compared with ATX for the treatment of ADHD in children and adolescents.

A comparison of levofloxacin and moxifloxacin use in hospitalized community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) patients in the US: focus on length of stay.

OBJECTIVE: Length of stay (LOS) and hospitalization costs were compared among patients admitted for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and initially treated with either levofloxacin 750 mg intravenous (IV) or with moxifloxacin 400 mg IV. Hospital-related complications and relationship of LOS and comorbidities were descriptively examined. METHODS: A retrospective database study was conducted of adult patients admitted for CAP and given levofloxacin 750 mg IV or moxifloxacin 400 mg IV through the first 3 days of hospitalization, using the Premier Perspective comparative database. Cohorts were matched 1:1 by hospital geographic location, by coarse caliper propensity scores using all baseline covariates, and by Mahalanobis metric matching based on age and severity (All Patient Refined-Diagnosis-related Groups Severity of Illness (APR-DRG SOI) index). Comparisons between groups were further adjusted for characteristics that remained imbalanced after matching using generalized estimating equation methodology. RESULTS: The initial sample of 3868 patients (levofloxacin = 827; moxifloxacin = 3041) was reduced to 1594 (797 patients per treatment group) after matching. Analyses of matched cohorts showed that the mean hospital LOS was significantly shorter for patients treated with levofloxacin 750 mg IV than for those patients treated with moxifloxacin 400 mg IV (5.8 vs. 6.4 days, respectively; least squares mean difference = 0.54 days; p = 0.020). Hospitalization costs were also lower for the levofloxacin 750 mg IV-treated patients (least squares mean difference = US$129; p = 0.753). There were no significant differences in the percentage of patients experiencing complications. LIMITATIONS: Although claims databases provide large sample sizes and reflect routine care, they do have several inherent limitations. Since randomization of subjects is not possible, adequate statistical techniques must be used to ensure treatment groups are balanced with respect to patient and clinical characteristics. In addition, data may be missing or miscoded. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study suggests that among patients hospitalized with CAP, initial treatment with levofloxacin 750 mg IV is associated with a significantly shorter mean hospital LOS compared with treatment with moxifloxacin 400 mg IV. The clinical implications of a shorter hospital LOS include improved patient and economic outcomes.