RESUMEN
AIMS: To compare healthcare costs in patients with non-inhibitor hemophilia A treated with Rurioctocog Alfa Pegol (FVIII-PEG) versus Antihemophilic Factor (Recombinant), FC Fusion Protein (rFVIIIFc). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Administrative claims data from the Merative MarketScan Commercial (Commerical) and Medicaid (Medicaid) databases were used for these analyses. Males with non-inhibitor hemophilia A treated with FVIII-PEG or rFVIIIFc from 1 January 2016 to 31 March 2021 were identified (earliest treatment = index). Patients were required to have continuous database enrollment for six months before and after the index date. Follow-up was variable in length until disenrollment or study end. All-cause and hemophilia-related healthcare costs were reported per-patient per month [PPPM] and the average weekly dose during follow-up was compared between treatment groups. Generalized linear regressions were used to estimate multivariable-adjusted differences in total costs and weekly dosage in the two treatment groups. RESULTS: A total of 131 FVIII-PEG (66 Commercial; 65 Medicaid) and 204 rFVIIIFc (111 Commercial; 93 Medicaid) patients were eligible. Mean age was 20.5 and 24.4 for FVIII-PEG and rFVIIIFc in Commercial and 14.9 and 17.5 for FVIII-PEG and rFVIIIFc in Medicaid. PPPM mean (standard deviations [SD]) total healthcare costs in Commercially insured patients were $35,868 [$21,717] for FVIII-PEG vs $40,424 [$25,882] for rFVIIIFc. Costs in Medicaid were $27,495 [$23,243] for FVIII-PEG vs $30,237 [$28,430] for rFVIIIFc. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, the costs for rFVIIIFc (vs FVIII-PEG) were higher by $5,215 in Commercial and $3,895 in Medicaid, but the differences were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Similar findings were observed for hemophilia-specific healthcare costs. The adjusted mean weekly dose was 6,047 vs 4,892 IU, p = 0.21 for FVIII-PEG vs rFVIIIFc in Commercial and 5,549 vs 7,228 IU, p = 0.07 for FVIII-PEG vs rFVIIIFc in Medicaid. CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare costs and treatment dosing were similar (p > 0.05) for non-inhibitor hemophilia A patients treated with FVIII-PEG and rFVIIIFc.
Asunto(s)
Hemofilia A , Masculino , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Adulto Joven , Adulto , Hemofilia A/tratamiento farmacológico , Proteínas Recombinantes de Fusión , Semivida , Factor VIII , Proteínas Recombinantes/uso terapéutico , Costos de la Atención en SaludRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Hemophilia A is often viewed as a male disease; females are usually considered asymptomatic hemophilia A carriers. However, hemophilia A carriers may experience mild-to-severe bleeding events. OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical characteristics, health care resource utilization, and costs incurred by hemophilia A carriers compared with a non-hemophilia A carrier female control population in the United States. METHODS: This retrospective observational cohort study used data from IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters and Multi-State Medicaid Databases from January 1, 2016, to September 30, 2019. Patients with a hemophilia A carrier diagnosis were matched to a non-hemophilia A carrier female control group in a 1:2 ratio based on sociodemographic characteristics, pregnancy status, and insurance type. Billed annualized bleed rates, health care resource utilization, and annualized costs were evaluated. Generalized linear models compared annualized total costs in the hemophilia A carrier and control groups. RESULTS: After matching, the hemophilia A carrier group included 121 (Commercial) and 55 (Medicaid) patients, matched 1:2 in the control group. Patients in the hemophilia A carrier group (compared with the control group) had numerically higher joint-related health issues (Commercial: 11.6% vs 7.9%; Medicaid: 7.3% vs 4.5%) and lower soft-tissue disorders (Commercial: 13.2% vs 17.4%; Medicaid: 12.7% vs 14.5%). Musculoskeletal pain was higher (33.1% vs 31.0%) and lower (21.8% vs 25.5%) in the Commercial and Medicaid databases, respectively. Billed annualized bleed rates were higher in the hemophilia A carrier group (Commercial: 0.49 vs 0.33; Medicaid: 0.50 vs 0.29). Significantly more patients in the hemophilia A carrier group had minor bleeds (Commercial: 34.7% vs 22.3% [P = 0.001]; Medicaid: 43.6% vs 20.0% [P < 0.001]) and spontaneous bleeds (Commercial: 35.5% vs 21.5%; Medicaid: 47.3% vs 23.6% [P < 0.001 for both]). Outpatient visits represented the majority of health care resource utilization and were higher in the hemophilia A carrier group for all-cause and bleed-related claims; although less frequent, emergency department and inpatient visits followed a similar trend. In the Commercial and Medicaid databases, hemophilia A carriers incurred approximately 2 times higher mean (SD) all-cause health care total costs than patients in the control group (Commercial: $15,345 [21,871] vs $8,358 [11,939] per patient per year [PPPY]; Medicaid: $9,022 [19,461] vs $4,533 [9,532] PPPY). CONCLUSIONS: Hemophilia A carriers experienced more complications and incurred higher costs (resulting from more outpatient, emergency department, and inpatient visits) compared with patients in the control group. These data suggest that hemophilia A carriers have a high disease and economic burden and may benefit from early diagnosis and management to prevent long-term complications. DISCLOSURES: Dr Xing, Dr Bullano, Dr Caicedo, and Mr Farahbakhshian are employees of Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc., hold Takeda stocks, and have been granted restricted stock shares; Drs Xing and Caicedo received support from Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc., for travel to THSNA 2022, where the data included in this manuscript were presented. Dr Batt received consulting fees from Complete HEOR Solutions (CHEORS) LLC for the protocol development, data analysis, and interpretation of this study; she also holds stocks from Merck and Sanofi. Ms Kuharic is an employee of the University of Illinois at Chicago and has been supported by a Takeda fellowship during the execution of the study. Ms Chakladar and Ms Markan were employees of CHEORS LLC at the time of the study. CHEORS has received funding from Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc., for conducting the analysis of this study. This study was funded by Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. The sponsor was involved in the study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; development and review of the manuscript; and decision to submit manuscript to publication.
Asunto(s)
Atención a la Salud , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Embarazo , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Hemorragia/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Females with haemophilia A (HA [FHAs]) and HA carriers (HACs) have an increased risk of bleeding and complications compared to the general population. AIM: To examine the characteristics, billed annualised bleed rates (ABRb ), costs and healthcare resource utilisation for males with HA (MHAs), FHAs and HACs in the United States. METHODS: Data were extracted from the IBM® MarketScan® Research Databases (Commercial and Medicaid) for claims during the index period (July 2016 to September 2018) and analysed across MHAs, FHAs and HACs. RESULTS: Dual diagnosis females (DDFs; both HA and HAC claims) were grouped as a separate cohort. MHAs were generally younger than females (all cohorts) by up to 19 years (Commercial) and 23 years (Medicaid). ABRb >0 was more frequent in females. Factor VIII claims were higher for MHAs versus female cohorts. Joint-related health issues were reported for 24.4 and 25.6% (Commercial) and 29.3 and 26.6% (Medicaid) of MHAs and FHAs, respectively; lower rates were reported in the other two cohorts. Heavy menstrual bleeding claims occurred for approximately a fifth (Commercial) to a quarter (Medicaid) of female cohorts. All-cause emergency department and inpatient visits in FHAs and DDFs were similar to, or more frequent than, those in MHAs; bleed-related inpatient visits were infrequent. In MHAs (Commercial), mean all-cause total costs ($214,083) were higher than in FHAs ($40,388), HACs ($15,647) and DDFs ($28,320) with similar trends for Medicaid patients. CONCLUSIONS: FHAs and HACs may be undermanaged and undertreated. Further research is needed to fully understand these cohorts' bleeding rates, long-term complications and costs.
Asunto(s)
Costos de la Atención en Salud , Hemofilia A , Masculino , Humanos , Femenino , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Hemofilia A/complicaciones , Hemofilia A/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud , Hemorragia/etiología , DemografíaRESUMEN
AIM: Gaucher disease (GD) is a rare autosomal recessive condition. Type 1 GD (GD1) is the most prevalent form of GD in Western countries; enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) is a treatment option for patients with GD1. To understand the economic value of the GD1 ERT velaglucerase alfa, a budget impact model (BIM) was developed from a United States (US) payer perspective. METHODS: We estimated the budget impact of velaglucerase alfa for a 10-million-member US health plan by comparing the annual total costs of therapy between a scenario using current velaglucerase alfa uptake to a projected scenario with increased velaglucerase alfa uptake. Total drug costs for both scenarios were estimated as the sum of the product of the number of eligible patients on each treatment and the annual per-patient cost of each medication. Average per-patient costs for ERTs were calculated by adding the yearly drug acquisition, drug administration, and site-of-care markup costs. The budget impact was measured over years 1-3. RESULTS: An estimated 65 patients would receive velaglucerase alfa treatment in year 1, increasing to 90 patients by year 3. Across analyses, cost savings were realized with velaglucerase alfa compared with imiglucerase ($115,909) and taliglucerase alfa ($80,401). An annual total budget savings of $8.67 million could be realized for a hypothetical 10-million-member US health plan with increased velaglucerase alfa uptake. The per-member per-month costs decreased by $0.0241 across years 1-3. CONCLUSIONS: BIM results show that increased velaglucerase alfa uptake for GD1 treatment is cost-saving for US health plans.
Type 1 Gaucher disease (GD1) is a rare inherited condition. Long-term enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) can reverse and prevent complications. Imiglucerase, taliglucerase alfa, and velaglucerase alfa are 3 ERTs used to treat GD1. In this study, we estimated how increasing uptake of velaglucerase alfa vs. the other ERTs would impact the budget of a hypothetical US healthcare plan. The results show that increased uptake of velaglucerase alfa is cost-saving for US health plans.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad de Gaucher , Presupuestos , Ahorro de Costo , Costos de los Medicamentos , Terapia de Reemplazo Enzimático/métodos , Enfermedad de Gaucher/tratamiento farmacológico , Humanos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Examine associations between oral psychostimulant pharmacotherapy adherence, work productivity, and related indirect costs among US adults with ADHD. METHODS: Medication adherence (Medication Adherence Reasons Scale [MAR-Scale]), work productivity and activity impairment (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment-General Health questionnaire), and ADHD symptom level (Adult ADHD Self-Report Scale version 1.1 Symptom Checklist) were assessed in this noninterventional online survey of adults who self-reported having an ADHD diagnosis and were currently receiving oral psychostimulant treatment for ≥3 months. RESULTS: Of 602 respondents, 395 had low/medium adherence (LMA: MAR-Scale total score ≥1) and 207 had high adherence (HA: MAR-Scale total score 0). After adjusting for covariates, the LMA group had significantly greater levels of absenteeism, absenteeism-related indirect costs, and total indirect costs (all p < .01) than the HA group. CONCLUSION: In adults with ADHD using oral psychostimulants, lower medication adherence was associated with greater absenteeism and indirect costs.
Asunto(s)
Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad , Estimulantes del Sistema Nervioso Central , Absentismo , Adulto , Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/tratamiento farmacológico , Estimulantes del Sistema Nervioso Central/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Cumplimiento de la Medicación , AutoinformeRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To estimate the incremental economic burden of major surgeries in patients with von Willebrand disease (VWD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of the IBM Health MarketScan® database (2008-2018). Patients with at least two healthcare visits for VWD in the database who had undergone at least one major surgery unrelated to VWD (identified via International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Revisions procedure codes) were included. Patients without VWD with major surgeries were selected from a 1% random database sample. All patients had ≥12 months of continuous healthcare plan enrollment before and following their first major surgery. Patients with VWD were matched (1:1) with patients without VWD using propensity score matching. Regression models compared healthcare resource utilization and costs between the matched cohorts over a 12-month period after patients' index major surgery. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, 2972 pairs were selected. Musculoskeletal and digestive surgeries were the two most common major surgeries (patients with VWD, 39.6% and 25.0%; without VWD, 37.1% and 23.4%, respectively). Patients with VWD were significantly more likely (p<0.0001) to have an inpatient admission (odds ratio = 1.71; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.52-1.92) or emergency room visit (odds ratio = 1.41; 95% CI 1.25-1.59) than patients without VWD. The numbers of inpatient admissions (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.47; 95% CI 1.35-1.60), emergency room visits (IRR = 1.44; 95% CI 1.31-1.59), and outpatient visits (IRR = 1.16; 95% CI 1.11-1.21) per patient were also significantly greater for patients with VWD than for those without VWD (p<0.0001). Patients with VWD incurred significantly higher (p<0.0001) total healthcare costs (medical and pharmacy) per patient than patients without VWD ($50,733.89 versus $30,154.84, respectively). CONCLUSION: Healthcare resource utilization and associated costs among patients undergoing major surgeries were significantly higher for those with VWD than for patients without VWD.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) treatment rates in adults are low, possibly owing to discontinuation of pediatric care due to various circumstances (including inadequate health insurance coverage, poor disease insight, and patient/family resistance, as well as those who manage their ADHD independent of pharmacologic intervention) during the transition from adolescence to adulthood. To improve the understanding of treatment patterns during this transition, this study characterized pharmacotherapy use in patients with ADHD aged 16-21 years. METHODS: A retrospective claims analysis of the IBM® MarketScan® Commercial Databases, which represent all census regions of the USA, included patients aged 16-21 years with two or more ADHD diagnoses between 1/1/2008 and 12/31/2017 (one or more diagnoses during the year of age 17) who were continuously enrolled from ages 16-21 years and prescribed ADHD medication for ≥ 6 months at age 17 years. Pharmacotherapy use was assessed longitudinally. Comparisons between ages were conducted using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and McNemar tests. Treatment discontinuation was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analyses. RESULTS: The analysis included 10,292 patients. The overall percentage of patients receiving pharmacotherapy significantly decreased (p < 0.001, regardless of treatment type and presence of co-occurring psychiatric disorders) as patients aged, with a median time to treatment discontinuation of 2.94 years. Among patients using pharmacotherapy at the age of 17 years, more than 30% were no longer using pharmacotherapy at age 21 years. As patients aged, the percentage using long-acting amphetamines or methylphenidates decreased, and the percentage receiving no treatment increased. The percentage of patients with disrupted treatment from age 18 to 21 years ranged from 17.9 to 24.1%. After transitioning to disrupted treatment or no treatment, low percentages of patients returned to pharmacotherapy use (disrupted treatment: 15.7-21.5% per year; no treatment, 2.7-3.8% per year). Across all age groups, statistically significantly greater (p < 0.05) percentages of patients with co-occurring psychiatric disorders used lisdexamfetamine, dextroamphetamine-amphetamine mix short acting, and non-stimulants compared with patients without co-occurring psychiatric disorders. Patients with co-occurring psychiatric disorders remained on ADHD pharmacotherapy longer and switched or augmented their pharmacotherapy more frequently than patients without co-occurring psychiatric comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Patients rarely reinitiated treatment after pharmacotherapy was disrupted or discontinued, emphasizing the need for increased focus on the management of ADHD as patients transition from adolescence to adulthood.
Asunto(s)
Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/tratamiento farmacológico , Estimulantes del Sistema Nervioso Central/administración & dosificación , Trastornos Mentales/tratamiento farmacológico , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Adolescente , Factores de Edad , Bases de Datos Factuales , Femenino , Humanos , Estudios Longitudinales , Masculino , Trastornos Mentales/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Tiempo , Estados Unidos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
Several recent phase 3 clinical trials of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medications have used the Weiss Functional Impairment Rating Scale-Parent Report (WFIRS-P). Here, we assess WFIRS-P response in individual patients in two pivotal trials of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) and guanfacine extended release (GXR). We also analysed pooled WFIRS-P data from seven phase 3 studies of ADHD medications to shed light on factors associated with baseline functional impairment. The proportion of patients with a change in WFIRS-P score that exceeded the minimal important difference (MID) criteria for response was greater for LDX than placebo in the Family, Learning and School, and Risky Activities domains, and was greater for GXR than placebo in the Social Activities, Learning and School, and Family domains. Responders had significantly worse baseline scores in all WFIRS-P domains (all p < 0.001) than non-responders. In the pooled analyses, baseline WFIRS-P scores in all domains were significantly worse in participants with oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) than in those without ODD. Having combined type or hyperactive-impulsive type ADHD, being enrolled into a study in Europe, being male and being younger also had modest negative effects on baseline WFIRS-P scores. The present analysis of WFIRS-P response shows that previously reported group-level improvements in WFIRS-P functional impairment score translated into clinically relevant improvements in many individual participants. Functional impairment is a diverse and subjective construct that is influenced by multiple factors. Optimal management of individuals with ADHD should involve monitoring improvements in functioning and quality of life, as well as symptomatic improvement.
Asunto(s)
Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/tratamiento farmacológico , Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/psicología , Calidad de Vida/psicología , Adolescente , Niño , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: von Willebrand disease (VWD) can lead to serious, life-threatening bleeding events associated with substantial clinical and economic burden. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence, health care resource utilization (HCRU), and costs associated with major bleeding events in patients with VWD. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of the IBM MarketScan database (2008-2016). Selected patients had ≥ 2 VWD diagnoses, no diagnosis of acquired coagulation factor deficiency, and continuous health care plan enrollment for ≥ 12 months from eligibility start date. Prevalence was calculated as the proportion of eligible patients with ≥ 1 major bleeding event during the observation period (start to end of continuous eligibility). HCRU and costs in the 12-month continuous enrollment period following the first major bleeding event were compared with those from a comparable 12-month period for patients without major bleeding events. RESULTS: Of the 19,785 patients with VWD, 15% experienced ≥ 1 major bleeding event during a median follow-up of 4 years; 89% of these events were gastrointestinal bleeds. For the economic analysis, 773 patients with ≥ 1 major bleeding event and 4,285 patients without major bleeding events met the selection criteria. Controlling for baseline covariates, patients with major bleeding events had significantly (P < 0.0001) more inpatient admissions (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 3.2; 95% CI = 2.78-3.77), longer inpatient stays (IRR = 3.9; 95% CI = 3.12-4.93), and more emergency department visits (IRR = 2.0; 95% CI = 1.77-2.27) and outpatient visits (IRR = 1.3; 95% CI = 1.19-1.34) than patients without major bleeding events. Annual health care costs were significantly higher (P < 0.01) for patients with major bleeding events than those without them (predicted mean cost differences: total = $20,890, pharmacy = $2,593, and medical = $18,293). CONCLUSIONS: Major bleeding events were associated with increased HCRU and costs, mostly inpatient costs. Therefore, optimizing therapy to prevent or reduce major bleeding events has the potential to reduce health care use and costs in patients with VWD. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Baxalta U.S. Inc., a Takeda company (Lexington, MA). The study sponsor was involved with the study design, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing of the manuscript; and the decision to publish the article. Lu, Wu, and Ewenstein are employees of Baxalta U.S. Inc., a Takeda company, and are Takeda stock owners. Farahbakhshian is an employee of Shire U.S. Inc., a Takeda company, and is a Takeda stock owner. Oladapo was an employee of Baxalta U.S. Inc., a Takeda company, at the time the analysis was completed and the manuscript developed, and is a Takeda stock owner.
Asunto(s)
Costo de Enfermedad , Costos de la Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Hemorragia/economía , Enfermedades de von Willebrand/complicaciones , Reclamos Administrativos en el Cuidado de la Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Niño , Preescolar , Comercio/economía , Comercio/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Hemorragia/epidemiología , Hemorragia/etiología , Hemorragia/terapia , Humanos , Incidencia , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Seguro de Salud/economía , Seguro de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud , Admisión del Paciente/economía , Admisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Adulto Joven , Enfermedades de von Willebrand/economía , Enfermedades de von Willebrand/terapiaRESUMEN
Objective: This study examined adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) screening and management patterns among healthcare provider (HCP) subgroups. Methods: An online survey of US-based HCPs (neurologists, n = 200; nurse practitioners [NPs], n = 100; psychiatrists, n = 201; primary care physicians [PCPs], n = 201) was conducted from May to June 2017. The survey assessed issues relating to adult ADHD screening and management and HCP perceptions of factors influencing patient choice of pharmacotherapy. Participants were required to be experienced in diagnosing and/or treating ADHD in adults (≥5 patients/month for neurologists and NPs; ≥10 patients/month for psychiatrists and PCPs). Results: Significantly greater percentages of psychiatrists than non-psychiatrists were confident in diagnosing ADHD (P < 0.001) and screened/evaluated for ADHD in patients with depression/anxiety disorders (P < 0.001). Significantly greater percentages of psychiatrists versus non-psychiatrists prescribed once-daily long-acting (LA) stimulants (71.6% vs 62.2%; P = 0.023) or short-acting (SA) stimulants more than once daily (40.3% vs 29.7%; P = 0.009) as first-line therapy. In contrast, a significantly greater percentage of non-psychiatrists than psychiatrists prescribed once-daily SA stimulants (32.9% vs 17.4%; P < 0.001). Psychiatrist and non-psychiatrist HCPs viewed insurance coverage/treatment costs (79.9%), perceived duration of effect (72.2%), and side effects (66.5%) as important factors to patients when choosing treatment. HCPs reported that the greatest mean ± SD percentages of patients changed their treatment regimen in the past 6 months because of perceptions of insufficient duration of effect (35.4% ± 22.1%) and lack of efficacy (30.3% ± 21.0%). Conclusion: Compared with psychiatrists, non-psychiatrists exhibited less confidence in diagnosing adult ADHD and experienced greater difficulty determining optimal treatment regimens.
Asunto(s)
Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/diagnóstico , Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/terapia , Actitud del Personal de Salud , Estimulantes del Sistema Nervioso Central/uso terapéutico , Psicoterapia , Adulto , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Tamizaje Masivo , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neurólogos , Enfermeras Practicantes , Médicos de Atención Primaria , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , PsiquiatríaRESUMEN
AIMS: Assess the relationship between timely treatment intensification and hemoglobin A1C (HbA1C) control quality-of-care performance measures, i.e., HbA1C levels, among patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic medical records and diabetes registry data from a large, accountable care organization (ACO) were used to isolate a sample of adult patients with type 2 diabetes who received at least one oral antidiabetes agent and had at least one HbA1C level measurement ≥8.0% (64 mmol/mol; i.e., uncontrolled diabetes) between 7/1/2011 and 6/30/2015. Treatment intensification status was evaluated for each patient during a 120-day treatment intensification window following the index HbA1c measure. Two-level hierarchical generalized linear models, with patients aggregated at the physician level, were used to assess the association between treatment intensification and achieving HbA1C quality performance measures. RESULTS: 547 patients met study selection criteria and 480 patients had at least one HbA1C test after the treatment intensification window and were used for the statistical analyses. About 40% of patients who had uncontrolled diabetes received treatment intensification during the 120-day window. Greater index HbA1C, greater patient body mass index, and fewer unique pre-index oral antidiabetes agents were significantly associated with greater likelihood of receiving timely treatment intensification. The odds of receiving treatment intensification were about 1.8 times higher (P = 0.0027) among patients with poor index HbA1C control (HbA1c level >9.0% [75 mmol/mol]) compared to other patients (index HbA1c 8.0% - 9.0%). Hispanic patients (compared to White patients) were significantly more likely to exhibit poor control after treatment intensification (odds ratio [OR] 2.91, P = 0.0304), underscoring the difficulty of controlling diabetes in this vulnerable group. In contrast, being male and being treated primarily by an internist (compared to primary treatment by a family medicine specialist) were both significantly associated with achieving superior control (HbA1c level <8.0%) after treatment intensification (OR 0.53 [P = 0.0165]; OR 0.41 [P = 0.0275], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Timely treatment intensification was significantly associated with greater likelihood of patients achieving superior HbA1C control (<8.0%) and better HbA1C control quality performance for the practice. Even in an ACO with resources dedicated to diabetes control, it is incumbent upon clinicians to readily identify and open dialogues with patients who may benefit from closely supervised, individualized attention.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/sangre , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamiento farmacológico , Registros Electrónicos de Salud , Hemoglobina Glucada/análisis , Hipoglucemiantes/administración & dosificación , Administración del Tratamiento Farmacológico/normas , Calidad de la Atención de Salud , Administración Oral , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Índice de Masa Corporal , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud , Estudios Retrospectivos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: The objective was to compare the use of low-dose liraglutide (LD-L) (Victoza) to the other glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) in patients without a type 2 diabetes (T2D) diagnosis in the post approval period for high-dose liraglutide (HD-L) (Saxenda), which is not indicated for T2D. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective, repeated cross-sectional, cohort study. METHODS: Adult patients with T2D with more than 1 prescription for a GLP-1 RA in the Optum Humedica database between December 2014 and March 2016 were included. The proportions of patients without a T2D diagnosis who were prescribed L-DL versus the other GLP-1 RAs and within each cohort were computed. Logistic regression models estimated the predictive value of either treatment in those without a T2D diagnosis, controlling for multiple factors. To supplement these findings, administrative claims data were extracted from the Truven Health MarketScan database. RESULTS: Analyses identified 11,245 patients prescribed LD-L and 4134 patients prescribed other GLP-1 RAs. For the entire study period, Humedica data revealed that patients without T2D accounted for 2.7% of the GLP-1 RA cohort and 17.5% of the LD-L cohort. Multivariable logistic regression analyses identified that patients receiving LD-L were more than 6 times likely to have no indication of T2D relative to patients taking other GLP-1 RAs. Claims data from MarketScan corroborated the Humedica results. CONCLUSIONS: In patients without a T2D diagnosis, LD-L use was significantly greater than that with other GLP-1 RAs within 6 months after approval of HD-L; differences persisted until the end of the study. Increased payer scrutiny of appropriate LD-L use is warranted.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamiento farmacológico , Péptido 1 Similar al Glucagón/uso terapéutico , Hipoglucemiantes/uso terapéutico , Liraglutida/uso terapéutico , Adulto , Estudios de Cohortes , Estudios Transversales , Esquema de Medicación , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Cumplimiento de la Medicación , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To compare healthcare costs of adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) after initiation of saxagliptin or linagliptin, two antidiabetic medications in the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor medication class. METHODS: Patients with T2D who were at least 18 years old and initiated saxagliptin or linagliptin (index date) between 1 June 2011 and 30 June 2014 were identified in the MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Databases. All-cause healthcare costs and diabetes-related costs (T2D diagnosis on a medical claim and/or an antidiabetic medication claim) were measured in the 1 year follow-up period. Saxagliptin and linagliptin initiators were matched using propensity score methods. Cost ratios (CRs) and predicted costs were estimated from generalized linear models and recycled predictions. RESULTS: There were 34,560 saxagliptin initiators and 18,175 linagliptin initiators identified (mean ages 57 and 59; 55% and 56% male, respectively). Before matching, saxagliptin initiators had significantly lower all-cause total healthcare costs than linagliptin initiators (mean = $15,335 [SD $28,923] vs. mean = $20,069 [SD $48,541], p < .001) and significantly lower diabetes-related total healthcare costs (mean = $6109 [SD $13,851] vs. mean = $7393 [SD $26,041], p < .001). In matched analyses (n = 16,069 per cohort), saxagliptin initiators had lower all-cause follow-up costs than linagliptin initiators (CR = 0.953, 95% CI = 0.932-0.974, p < .001; predicted costs = $17,211 vs. $18,068). There was no significant difference in diabetes-related total costs after matching; however, diabetes-related medical costs were significantly lower for saxagliptin initiators (CR = 0.959, 95% CI = 0.927-0.993, p = 0.017; predicted costs = $3989 vs. $4159). CONCLUSIONS: Adult patients with T2D initiating treatment with saxagliptin had lower total all-cause healthcare costs and diabetes-related medical costs over 1 year compared with patients initiating treatment with linagliptin.
Asunto(s)
Adamantano/análogos & derivados , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Dipéptidos , Costos de la Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Hipoglucemiantes , Linagliptina , Adamantano/economía , Adamantano/uso terapéutico , Adulto , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamiento farmacológico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/economía , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiología , Dipéptidos/economía , Dipéptidos/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Humanos , Hipoglucemiantes/economía , Hipoglucemiantes/uso terapéutico , Revisión de Utilización de Seguros , Linagliptina/economía , Linagliptina/uso terapéutico , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To estimate real-world healthcare utilization and expenditures across the spectrum of chronic kidney disease (CKD), as determined by estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) categories in patients with diabetes. METHODS: This study employed a retrospective cohort study design using the Truven Healthcare and Claims Dataset from 2009-2012. Index date was defined as the first eGFR value during a continuous enrollment period of 24 months. Cohorts of patients were stratified by Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes CKD stage based on eGFR (stages 1: ≥90 mL/min/1.73 m2; 2: 60-89; 3A: 45-59; 3B: 30-44; 4: 15-29; 5: <15). Healthcare expenditures (total patient and payer paid claims) and utilization (number of claims or visits) were estimated 12-months post-index date using generalized linear modeling and negative binomial modeling, respectively, after adjusting for baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Of 130,098 patients with an index eGFR value and 24-months continuous enrolment, 64,521 (49.59%) were in stage 1 CKD, 47,816 (36.75%) were in stage 2, 13,377 (10.28%) were in stage 3A, 3,217 (2.47%) were in stage 3B, 898 (0.69%) were in stage 4, and 269 (0.21%) were in stage 5. Patients in stages 3A, 3B, and 4 CKD had 1.32 (95% CI = 1.22-1.43), 1.59 (95% CI = 1.41-1.80), and 2.65 (95% CI = 2.23-3.14) times higher rates of diabetes-associated inpatient visits, respectively, compared with stage 1 CKD patients. Patients in stages 3A, 3B, and 4 CKD had increased incremental total annual healthcare expenditures of $1,732 (95% CI = $1,109-$2,356), $2,632 (95% CI = $1,647-$3,619), and $6,949 (95% CI = $5,466-$8,432), respectively, compared with stage 1 CKD patients. LIMITATIONS: The claims data were generated for billing and reimbursement, not for research purposes. CONCLUSIONS: These real-world data suggest an incremental and significant increase in economic burden in diabetes as kidney function declines, starting with moderate (stage 3A) CKD.