Out-of-Pocket Costs for Long-Acting Injectable and Oral Antipsychotics Among Medicare Patients With Schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: The authors sought to describe out-of-pocket (OOP) costs among beneficiaries with schizophrenia differing in Medicare Part D low-income subsidy (LIS) status. METHODS: National 100% Medicare claims were used to identify all adult fee-for-service Medicare Part D beneficiaries with schizophrenia who used antipsychotics in 2019 (N=283,813). Proportions of patients by LIS status, OOP costs per prescription, and annual OOP costs were reported. Results were stratified by type of antipsychotic received (oral antipsychotic [OAP], first-generation long-acting injectable [FGA-LAI], or second-generation long-acting injectable [SGA-LAI]). RESULTS: In the final sample, 90.3% of beneficiaries had full LIS status, paying minimal copayments (29.6% institutionalized full LIS, paying $0; 42.2% noninstitutionalized full LIS, ≤100% federal poverty level [FPL], paying $1.25-$3.80; and 18.5% noninstitutionalized full LIS, >100% FPL, paying $3.40-$8.50). Only 0.9% of the sample received partial LIS status, and 8.8% had a non-LIS status. Non-LIS beneficiaries had the highest OOP costs, followed by partial LIS beneficiaries. Before entering catastrophic coverage, median OOP costs per prescription for generic OAPs, brand-name OAPs, FGA-LAIs, and SGA-LAIs were $10.85, $171.97, $26.09, and $394.28, respectively, for non-LIS beneficiaries and $3.69, $105.82, $9.35, and $229.20, respectively, for partial LIS beneficiaries. The annual total OOP costs varied substantially by LIS status (full LIS, $0-$130.79; partial LIS, $458.96; non-LIS, $998.81). CONCLUSIONS: Most Medicare beneficiaries with schizophrenia qualified for full LIS and faced minimal OOP costs for both OAPs and LAIs. The remainder (i.e., partial LIS and non-LIS beneficiaries) faced substantial OOP costs, both per prescription and annually, especially for SGA-LAIs.

Post Hospitalization Clinical Quality Outcomes Among US Patients with Schizophrenia Treated with a Long-Acting Injectable or Switched to a New Oral Antipsychotic: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND:  Adherence to antipsychotic medication and care discontinuity remain a challenge to healthcare practitioners providing care to patients with schizophrenia. OBJECTIVE: This study used real-world data from a US hospital-based, all-payer database to examine clinical quality measures among patients with schizophrenia initiated on a long-acting injectable (LAI) or switched to a new oral antipsychotic medication (OAP) following a hospitalization. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using the PINC AI™ Healthcare Database compared two cohorts of patients with schizophrenia on post-index hospitalization clinical quality and care continuity endpoints. Patients initiated on an LAI (n = 7292) or switched to a new OAP (n = 31,956) during an index hospitalization between April 2017 and April 2020 were included. Propensity score weighting addressed differences in patient, hospital, and clinical characteristics between the two cohorts. RESULTS: Patients who initiated an LAI experienced significantly greater adjusted 30-day antipsychotic medication continuation to index therapy, higher rate of 30-day outpatient follow-up care, longer mean time to discontinuation of index therapy, and lower risk of discontinuing their index treatment compared to patients who switched to a new OAP (all p values < 0.001). Probability of 30-day antipsychotic medication continuation was significantly higher for LAI initiators than for patients who switched to a new OAP, even after controlling for patient, clinical, and hospital characteristics (adjusted odds ratio = 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.3, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients who initiated an LAI in a hospital setting experienced better clinical quality and care continuity outcomes compared to patients who were switched to a new OAP. These findings may be useful in identifying solutions to help improve the quality of medication management post-hospital discharge among patients with schizophrenia.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotic Use in a National Sample of Medicare Beneficiaries With Schizophrenia.

This cross-sectional study assesses the racial and ethnic disparities in long-acting injectable antipsychotic use in a national sample of Medicare beneficiaries with schizophrenia.

Continuity of care among patients newly initiated on second-generation oral or long-acting injectable antipsychotics during a schizophrenia-related inpatient stay.

BACKGROUND: Maintaining continuity of care after schizophrenia-related hospitalization is challenging for patients and healthcare providers and systems. Prior evidence suggests that second-generation long-acting injectable antipsychotics (SGLAIs) may reduce the risk of treatment nonadherence and readmission versus oral atypical antipsychotics (OAAs). Therefore, quality measures were compared between patients initiated on SGLAIs and OAAs in the United States. METHODS: Adults newly initiated on an SGLAI or OAA during a schizophrenia-related inpatient stay were identified in HealthVerity databases (01/2015-12/2020); the index date was the hospital discharge date. Patients had continuous health insurance coverage for pharmacy and medical services for 6 months pre-admission and post-discharge from the inpatient stay and ≥1 pharmacy or medical claim (i.e. treatment as indicated by the observed insurance claims) for an antipsychotic other than the index SGLAI or OAA in the 6 months pre-admission. Antipsychotic use and adherence, and schizophrenia-related readmissions and outpatient visits were compared during the 6-month period post-discharge. Characteristics between cohorts were balanced using inverse probability weights. RESULTS: Post-discharge, only 36.9% and 40.7% of weighted SGLAI (N = 466) and OAA (N = 517) patients had ≥1 pharmacy or medical claim for the antipsychotic initiated during the inpatient stay, among whom SGLAI patients were 4.4 times more likely to be adherent to that antipsychotic compared to OAA patients (p < .001). Additionally, SGLAI patients were 2.3 and 3.0 times more likely to have a pharmacy or medical claim for and be adherent to any antipsychotic relative to OAA patients (including index antipsychotic; all p < .001). Within 7 and 30 days post-discharge, 1.7% and 13.0% of SGLAI patients and 4.1% and 12.6% of OAA patients had a readmission. Further, SGLAI patients were 51% more likely to have an outpatient visit compared to OAA patients (p = .044). CONCLUSIONS: Less than half of patients initiated on antipsychotics during a schizophrenia-related inpatient stay continued the same treatment post-discharge. However, SGLAI patients were more likely to be adherent to the initiated antipsychotic and to have an outpatient visit, which may suggest improved continuity of care post-discharge relative to OAA patients.

A Cross-Sectional Study of Patient Out-of-Pocket Costs for Antipsychotics Among Medicaid Beneficiaries with Schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Patient affordability is an important nonclinical consideration for treatment access among patients with schizophrenia. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated and measured out-of-pocket (OOP) costs for antipsychotics (APs) among Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia. METHODS: Adults with a schizophrenia diagnosis, ≥ 1 AP claim, and continuous Medicaid eligibility were identified in the MarketScan® Medicaid Database (1 January 2018-31 December 2018). OOP AP pharmacy costs ($US 2019) were normalized for a 30-day supply. Results were descriptively reported by route of administration [ROA; orals (OAPs), long-acting injectables (LAIs)], generic/branded status within ROAs, and dosing schedule within LAIs. The proportion of total (pharmacy and medical) OOP costs AP-attributable was described. RESULTS: In 2018, 48,656 Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia were identified (mean age 46.7 years, 41.1% female, 43.4% Black). Mean annual total OOP costs were $59.97, $6.65 of which was AP attributable. Overall, 39.2%, 38.3%, and 42.3% of beneficiaries with a corresponding claim had OOP costs > $0 for any AP, OAP, and LAI, respectively. Mean OOP costs per patient per 30-day claim (PPPC) were $0.64 for OAPs and $0.86 for LAIs. By LAI dosing schedule, mean OOP costs PPPC were $0.95, $0.90, $0.57, and $0.39 for twice-monthly, monthly, once-every-2-months, and once-every-3-months LAIs, respectively. Across ROAs and generic/branded status, projected OOP AP costs per-patient-per-year for beneficiaries assumed fully adherent ranged from $4.52 to $13.70, representing < 25% of total OOP costs. CONCLUSION: OOP AP costs for Medicaid beneficiaries represented a small fraction of total OOP costs. LAIs with longer dosing schedules had numerically lower mean OOP costs, which were lowest for once-every-3-months LAIs among all APs.

The Effect of Longer Dosing Intervals for Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics on Outcomes in Schizophrenia.

Medication nonadherence in schizophrenia can have serious implications including relapses and hospitalization. Long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics require fewer administrations, while ensuring sustained medication coverage. In this review, we summarize the expected real-world benefits of longer dosing intervals in the management of schizophrenia. LAIs are associated with improved clinical outcomes of less frequent relapses and reduced functional impairment, encouraging patients to regain control of their lives. Aripiprazole lauroxil and paliperidone palmitate three-monthly (PP3M) LAIs have longer dosing intervals of 2-3 months and provide improved outcomes in patients with schizophrenia. Paliperidone palmitate six-monthly (PP6M) LAI provides the longest dosing interval, twice-yearly dosing, among existing LAIs. Decreasing the frequency of LAI administrations has the potential to reduce occurrence of serious outcomes associated with poor medication adherence. By eliminating the need for daily oral antipsychotic dosing, LAIs could increase the likelihood of patient acceptance, decrease stigma, and promote self-esteem. Longer intervals of medication coverage may be desirable for patients with higher risk of relapse including adults with recent-onset schizophrenia, those living in circumstances that may deprive them of regular access (eg, homeless), those that are in transitions between care settings or to reduce interpersonal contact during public health emergencies (eg, COVID-19 pandemic).

Antipsychotic utilization, healthcare resource use and costs, and quality of care among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries with schizophrenia in the United States.

BACKGROUND: No research to date has examined antipsychotic (AP) use, healthcare resource use (HRU), costs, and quality of care among those with schizophrenia in the Medicare program despite it serving as the primary payer for half of individuals with schizophrenia in the US. OBJECTIVES: To provide national estimates and assess regional variation in AP treatment utilization, HRU, costs, and quality measures among Medicare beneficiaries with schizophrenia. METHODS: Cross-sectional descriptive analysis of 100% Medicare claims data from 2019. The sample included all adult Medicare beneficiaries with continuous fee-for-service coverage and ≥1 inpatient and/or ≥2 outpatient claims with a diagnosis for schizophrenia in 2019. Summary statistics on AP use; HRU and cost; and quality measures were reported at the national, state, and county levels. Regional variation was measured using the coefficient of variation (CoV). RESULTS: We identified 314,888 beneficiaries with schizophrenia. About 91% used any AP; 20% used any long-acting injectable antipsychotic (LAI); and 14% used atypical LAIs. About 28% of beneficiaries had ≥1 hospitalization and 47% had ≥1 emergency room (ER) visits, the vast majority of which were related to mental health (MH). Total annual all-cause, MH, and schizophrenia-related costs were $23,662, $15,000 and $12,109, respectively. Among those with hospitalizations, 18.4% and 27.3% had readmission within 7 and 30 days and 56% and 67% had a physician visit and AP fill within 30 days post-discharge, respectively. Overall, 81% of beneficiaries were deemed adherent to their AP medications. Larger interstate variations were observed in LAI use than AP use (CoV: 0.21 vs 0.02). County-level variations were larger than state-level variations for all measures. CONCLUSIONS: In this first study examining a national sample of Medicare beneficiaries with schizophrenia, we found low utilization rates of LAIs and high levels of hospital admissions/readmissions and ER visits. State and county-level variations were also found in these measures.

Comparison of clinical outcomes in patients with schizophrenia following different long-acting injectable event-driven initiation strategies.

This retrospective study evaluated the benefit of following different long-acting injectable (LAI) initiation strategies based on the timing of behavioral and clinical events among Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia. Adults with schizophrenia initiating oral antipsychotics (OAPs) after 12 months without antipsychotic use or schizophrenia-related inpatient/emergency room (ER) visits (index date) were identified. Patients were categorized into four event-driven LAI initiation strategy cohorts based on observed sequences of behavioral (i.e., OAP adherence) and clinical (i.e., schizophrenia-related inpatient/ER visits) events between index and LAI initiation or censoring-strategy #1: adherent to OAPs without schizophrenia-related inpatient/ER visits; strategy #2: nonadherent to OAPs without schizophrenia-related inpatient/ER visits; strategy #3: one schizophrenia-related inpatient/ER visit; strategy #4: ≥2 schizophrenia-related inpatient/ER visits. Clinical outcomes (i.e., all-cause inpatient/ER visits) were evaluated between OAP initiation and end of follow-up. Comparisons between LAI initiation strategy cohorts were conducted using a dynamic marginal structural model adjusting for baseline characteristics and time-varying confounders. Among 13,444 eligible patients, 13.1%, 53.6%, 15.7%, and 17.6% were following strategies #1-4, respectively; of these, 21.9%, 4.3%, 9.2%, and 6.5% started an LAI (the remaining were censored). Strategy #1 was associated with a greater clinical benefit, with 43%, 69%, and 80% fewer inpatient days (all p < 0.05); and 57%, 59%, and 79% fewer ER visits (all p < 0.01) vs strategies #2-4, respectively; the clinical benefit was also observed for strategy #2 vs #3-4. Therefore, starting an LAI prior to OAP nonadherence or occurrence of a schizophrenia-related inpatient/ER visit was associated with fewer all-cause inpatient days of inpatient stay and ER visits.

Budget impact of introducing once-every-6-months paliperidone palmitate in US health care plans.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, most patients with schizophrenia have Medicaid coverage. Antipsychotic treatments are the cornerstone of schizophrenia management; most patients are treated with daily oral antipsychotics but struggle with medication adherence. Evidence suggests that medication adherence is inversely correlated with dosing frequency. Once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP) has been demonstrated to improve adherence compared with oral antipsychotics; transitioning to once-every-3-months PP (PP3M) further improved adherence. In 2021, once-every-6-months PP (PP6M) was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration to provide even longer between-dose intervals. Public health stakeholders who aim to improve medication adherence are interested in understanding how introducing PP6M to the formulary will impact the budget. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the budget impact of introducing PP6M to the formulary from the perspectives of a hypothetical US multistate health care payer and state Medicaid programs using California, Georgia, and Ohio as examples. METHODS: The budget impact model was developed from a payer perspective, comparing the reference scenario (without PP6M in the market) with a new scenario (with PP6M). The study population included patients with schizophrenia who were eligible to receive PP6M. Market shares were assigned to the reference and new market scenarios. Efficacy was measured by the relative risk of relapse while receiving treatment. Adherence effects were included in the model and affected costs of treatment and relapse rates. A deterministic 1-way sensitivity analysis was performed. RESULTS: Base-case results for a multistate payer with 1 million members demonstrate that adding PP6M to the market results in total incremental plan-level costs ranging from $7,747 in year 1 to $11,501 in year 5. Increased drug costs were offset by administration and relapse cost savings ($105 and $881 in year 5, respectively). The average incremental cost per treated patient per year was stable at $180.06 for each year, and the incremental cost per member per month stayed below $0.01 for each year. The results of the model from the state-level Medicaid scenarios are broadly similar to those of the multistate base-case perspective. The 1-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated the model is most sensitive to the per-package costs of PP6M and PP3M, along with the proportion of patients fully adherent with PP3M. CONCLUSIONS: The budget impact of introducing PP6M as a treatment option is minimal. With the expected cost offsets from reduced administration and relapse costs due to adherence benefits, these results suggest that PP6M can be a viable treatment option from a clinical and a budgetary perspective. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. The study sponsor provided funds to Xcenda and ApotheCom for medical writing, editorial support, and submission of the manuscript. Hilary Phelps was an employee of Janssen Global Services, LLC, at the time of the development and finalization of the manuscript. Alex Keenan is an employee of Janssen Global Services, LLC, and holds stock in Johnson & Johnson, Inc. Dee Lin and Carmela Benson are employees of Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, and hold stock in Johnson & Johnson, Inc. Aditya Raju was an employee of Xcenda at the time of the development and finalization of the manuscript, and Danmeng Huang is an employee of Xcenda, a health care consulting firm that was contracted by Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. Chih-Yuan Cheng is an employee of Janssen NV.

Real-world calibration and transportability of the Disease Recovery Evaluation and Modification (DREaM) randomized clinical trial in adult Medicaid beneficiaries with recent-onset schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: The Disease Recovery Evaluation and Modification study (DREaM; NCT02431702) assessed the benefit of initiating paliperidone palmitate (PP), a long-acting injectable antipsychotic, in patients with recent-onset schizophrenia or schizophreniform disorder. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether reductions in psychiatric hospitalizations with early initiation of PP vs oral antipsychotic (OAP) therapy observed in a DREaM post hoc analysis are transportable to a real-world population of patients with recent-onset schizophrenia. METHODS: Patients enrolled in DREaM were randomized to receive OAP or PP for 9 months, after which OAP recipients were re-randomized to receive OAP or PP for another 9 months. We used this design to form treatment arms: OAP-OAP, OAP-PP, and PP-PP. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were used to identify a Medicaid Managed Care (MMC) OAP-treated cohort of 1,000 patients diagnosed with schizophrenia using IBM Truven databases from 2015 to 2019. The MMC cohort was combined with the subset of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia enrolled in DREaM from US sites (N = 45, 43, and 44 for OAP-OAP, OAP-PP, and PP-PP, respectively). Propensity scores for the MMC cohort were estimated using baseline variables identified via double-lasso regression. Estimated propensity scores were used to weight psychiatric hospitalizations in the DREaM OAP-OAP group and compared with observed MMC OAP cohort psychiatric hospitalizations. After the successful calibration of the DREaM OAP-OAP group, similar approaches were taken for the OAP-PP and PP-PP groups to transport DREaM effects to MMC data. RESULTS: Standardized mean differences in baseline covariates between DREaM treatment arms and MMC groups were substantially reduced after calibration. The 18-month cumulative numbers of psychiatric hospitalizations per patient (SE) were 0.83 (0.14) for the MMC cohort, 0.43 (0.14) for the unweighted OAP-OAP, and 0.80 (0.37) for the calibrated OAP-OAP. The difference between the calibrated OAP-OAP and MMC was not statistically significant (difference, 0.03 [95% CI = -0.67 to 0.81]), indicating successful calibration. The mean difference in 18-month cumulative psychiatric hospitalizations relative to the MMC cohort was -0.77 (95% CI = -1.08 to -0.47) for OAP-PP and -0.83 (95% CI = -1.15 to -0.60) for PP-PP. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that results from the DREaM OAP-OAP group reflect psychiatric hospitalizations in a real-world population when calibrated using specific baseline characteristics. Transporting the DREaM effects, we find that using OAP-PP and PP-PP treatment strategies for patients with recent-onset schizophrenia in the MMC population could reduce psychiatric hospitalizations compared with the use of OAP. These findings, along with the potential reduction in associated costs, should be considered when assessing the value of PP formulations. DISCLOSURES: Dr Basu reports consulting fees through Salutis Consulting LLC related to this work. Dr Mavros is a former employee of the Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson, Inc, and holds stock in the company. Ms Benson, Dr Fu, Ms Patel, and Dr Brown are employees of Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, and hold stock in Johnson & Johnson. This research was funded by Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. The sponsor was involved in the study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; and development and review of the manuscript. All authors had full access to the study data and take responsibility for data integrity and the accuracy of the analyses. All authors provided direction and comments on the manuscript, reviewed and approved the final version prior to submission, made the final decision about where to publish these data, and approved submission to this journal.

Adherence, Persistence, Readmissions, and Costs in Medicaid Members with Schizophrenia or Schizoaffective Disorder Initiating Paliperidone Palmitate Versus Switching Oral Antipsychotics: A Real-World Retrospective Investigation.

INTRODUCTION: Long-acting injectable antipsychotic agents have been suggested to improve adherence and patient outcomes in schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. The purpose of this study was to assess medication use patterns (i.e., medication adherence, persistence), hospital and emergency department readmissions, and total direct medical costs of Oklahoma Medicaid members with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder switching from an oral antipsychotic (OAP) to once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP1M) or to another OAP (OAP-switch). METHODS: A historical cohort analysis was conducted from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2020 among adults aged ≥ 18 and ≤ 64 years with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who were previously treated with an OAP. The first claim for PP1M or a new OAP defined the study index date. Members who transitioned from PP1M to 3-month formulation (PP3M) were included (i.e., PP1M/PP3M). Proportion of days covered (PDC), 45-day treatment gaps, 30-day readmissions to hospitals or emergency department, and total direct medical costs were assessed using multivariable, machine-learning least absolute shrinkage, and selection operator (Lasso) regressions controlling for numerous demographic, clinical, mental health, and provider characteristics. RESULTS: Among 295 Medicaid members meeting full inclusion criteria, 183 involved PP1M/PP3Ms (44 PP1M cases transitioned to PP3M) and 112 involved an OAP-switch. The multivariable-adjusted odds of readmission were significantly associated with a 45-day treatment gap (p < 0.05) and non-adherence (i.e., PDC < 80%) (p < 0.05). Relative to PP1M/PP3Ms, the multivariable analyses also indicated that OAP-switch was associated with an 18.5% lower PDC, 92.3% higher number of 45-day treatment gaps, and an approximately 90% higher odds of all-cause 30-day readmission (p < 0.05). The adjusted pre- to post-index change in cost was approximately 49% lower for OAP-switches versus PP1M/PP3Ms (p < 0.001), although unadjusted post-index costs did not differ between groups (p = 0.440). CONCLUSION: This real-world investigation of adult Medicaid members with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder observed improved adherence and persistence with fewer readmissions with PP1M/PP3Ms versus OAP-switches.

Projecting the economic outcomes of switching patients with schizophrenia from oral atypical antipsychotics to once-monthly, once-every-3-months, and once-every-6-months paliperidone palmitate.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with schizophrenia, nonadherence to oral atypical antipsychotics (OAAs) leads to increased risk of relapses, which entails substantial economic burden. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact on health care costs and relapse rates of switching patients with schizophrenia from OAAs to once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP1M), with subsequent transitions to once-every-3-months (PP3M) and once-every-6-months paliperidone palmitate (PP6M). METHODS: A 36-month Markov model was developed from a Medicaid payer's perspective. Two non-mutually exclusive subpopulations of adults with schizophrenia who were nonadherent to OAAs were considered: (1) recently relapsed and (2) young adults (aged 18-35). Patients were assumed nonadherent to OAAs until switching treatments, which was permissible multiple times during the 36-month period. Patients switching to PP1M could subsequently transition to PP3M and PP6M. Relapse rates were assumed consistent across treatments based on patients' adherence. Model inputs were literature based. PP6M transition rates were assumed similar to PP3M. Cost savings were reported at the plan level and per patient switched. RESULTS: In a hypothetical health plan of 1 million Medicaid beneficiaries, an estimated 10,053 adults with schizophrenia were nonadherent to OAAs, among whom 7,454 were recently relapsed and 4,002 were young adults. Switching 5% of recently relapsed adults (N = 373) from OAAs to PP1M prior to subsequent relapse resulted in 541 relapses avoided and plan-level savings of $8.2M after 3 years. Incorporating transitions to PP3M/PP6M increased net savings to $9.1M and 631 relapses were avoided. Among young adults, switching 5% (N = 200) from OAAs to PP1M saved $1.8M at the plan level with 178 relapses avoided after 3 years. Including transitions to PP3M/PP6M, 3-year plan-level savings were $2.0M with 223 relapses avoided. Per recently relapsed patient switched to PP1M, and subsequently to PP3M/PP6M, cumulative 3-year cost savings were $22,100 and $24,300, respectively. Among young adults, corresponding 3-year cost savings per patient were $8,900 and $9,800. CONCLUSIONS: Switching nonadherent patients from OAAs to PP1M results in substantial cost savings and reduces relapse rates. Incorporating transitions to PP3M/PP6M leads to incremental cost savings and additional relapses avoided. DISCLOSURES: Financial support for this research was provided by Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. Ms Morrison, Ms Ghelerter, Ms Vermette-Laforme, Mr Lefebvre, and Mr Pilon are employees of Analysis Group, Inc., a consulting company that has provided paid consulting services to Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC., which funded the development and conduct of this study and manuscript. Dr Lin and Ms Benson are employees of Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC., and stockholders of Johnson & Johnson.

Comparing Relapse Rates in Real-World Patients with Schizophrenia Who Were Adequately versus Not Adequately Treated with Paliperidone Palmitate Once-Monthly Injections Before Transitioning to Once-Every-3-Months Injections.

Purpose: This retrospective cohort study evaluated real-world data on relapses in adult patients with schizophrenia who transitioned to long-acting injectable paliperidone palmitate once-every-3-months (PP3M) following treatment with once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP1M). Patients and Methods: Data derived from the IBM® MarketScan® Multi-State Medicaid Database were analyzed. Adults aged ≥18 years with ≥1 schizophrenia diagnosis claim and ≥12 months of continuous medical and prescription enrollment before and/or at index date of PP3M were eligible for inclusion. Patients were matched on propensity score to 2 PP3M cohorts: (1) adequately treated (AT), defined as patients treated with PP1M for ≥4 months, with the last 2 doses the same and a PP3M initiation dose meeting the corresponding PP1M-to-PP3M dose conversion, or (2) not adequately treated (NAT), defined as patients who received ≤2 or no PP1M doses. Relapse rates and time to relapse distributions based on the first occurrence of a qualifying event during the 2-year follow-up period were compared between PP3M cohorts using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and log rank test statistics. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using Cox proportional hazards models. Two sensitivity analyses using different matched populations were performed to assess the robustness of the primary findings. Results: Propensity score matching yielded a sample of 1314 patients (657 per group). Most patients were male (68.9%) and aged 25-64 years (90.1%). The relapse rate was significantly lower in the AT (18.4%) versus NAT cohort (26.8%), P = 0.0002. Risk of relapse decreased by 35% for AT versus NAT (HR: 0.65 [95% CI: 0.51-0.81]). Relapse reductions favored the AT cohort in both sensitivity analyses (HR: 0.67 [95% CI: 0.54-0.83] and HR: 0.74 [95% CI: 0.56-0.97]). Conclusion: In this analysis of Medicaid claims data, patients adequately treated with PP1M before transitioning to PP3M demonstrated significantly lower relapse rates and delayed time to relapse.

Health care resource utilization and costs in patients receiving long-acting injectable vs oral antipsychotics: A comparative analysis from the Disease Recovery Evaluation and Modification (DREaM) study.

BACKGROUND: Given relapse frequency early in the course of schizophrenia, recently diagnosed patients may benefit from longacting injectable antipsychotics, which are associated with reduced risk of relapse and hospitalization compared with oral antipsychotics (OAPs). OBJECTIVE: To compare health care resource utilization (HCRU) and costs in patients with recent-onset schizophrenia treated with continuous paliperidone palmitate (PP) or continuous OAP or who switched from OAP to PP. METHODS: In this analysis, we combined the 2 randomized phases of the prospective, open-label Disease Recovery Evaluation and Modification (DREaM) clinical study using the principal stratification method to generate 3 treatment strategies: continuous PP for 18 months (PP-PP), continuous OAP for 18 months (OAP-OAP), and initial OAP switched to PP after 9 months (OAP-PP). HCRU metrics included psychiatric hospitalizations, psychiatric and nonpsychiatric emergency department visits, and ambulatory visits. Costs were analyzed using generalized linear models with inverse-probability weighting based on time-varying probabilities of exposure. Robust SEs were estimated using individual-level clustered bootstrapping. Subgroup analyses were performed by region and prior antipsychotic use (< 6 vs ≥ 6 months). RESULTS: A total of 181 patients were included in the PP-PP (n = 61), OAP-OAP (n = 61), and OAP-PP (n = 59) groups. The majority of patients (73%) were enrolled at study sites in the United States, and 48% had received an antipsychotic for less than 6 months prior to study entry. Baseline characteristics were well balanced, and no significant differences in discontinuation rates were observed across treatment strategies. Compared with OAP-OAP, significantly lower cumulative HCRU and costs were apparent before 9 months in the PP-PP group and after 9 months in the OAP-PP group. The cumulative 18-month effects of PP-PP and OAP-PP vs OAP-OAP on the number of psychiatric hospitalizations were ‒0.28 (95% CI = ‒0.51 to ‒0.08) and ‒0.27 (95% CI = ‒0.50 to 0.04), respectively, and those on cumulative mean per-patient total health care costs (in 2020 USD) were -$2,867 (95% CI = ‒$5,133 to ‒$750) and ‒$2,789 (95% CI = ‒$5,155 to ‒$701), respectively. Subgroup analyses indicated a greater reduction in psychiatric hospitalizations and costs with PP-PP or OAP-PP relative to OAP-OAP in patients with less than 6 vs 6 or more months of prior antipsychotic therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous early use of PP in adults with recentonset schizophrenia significantly reduced psychiatric hospitalizations and associated estimated costs compared with OAP; these effects were particularly notable for patients with a shorter duration of prior antipsychotic use. As this was a post hoc analysis of a study that was not powered for HCRU assessments, future studies calibrating these effects to larger real-world populations will be useful. DISCLOSURES: Dr Basu reports consulting fees through Salutis Consulting LLC related to this work. Ms Benson, Dr Turkoz, Ms Patel, Dr Baker, and Dr Brown are employees of Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, and stockholders of Johnson & Johnson, Inc. This research was funded by Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. The sponsor was involved in the study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; development and review of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Unemployment, Homelessness, and Other Societal Outcomes Among US Veterans With Schizophrenia Relapse: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Objective: To evaluate societal outcomes including unemployment and homelessness among US veterans with schizophrenia with a history of relapse.Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) data from January 1, 2013, to September 30, 2019. Veterans with ≥ 2 diagnoses of schizophrenia, schizotypal disorder, and/or schizoaffective disorders (ICD-9-CM 295.xx, ICD-10-CM F20.x, F21, or F25.x) during the study period on different days were identified. The index date was the earliest observed diagnosis. Two cohorts were created and propensity score matched: (1) the relapse cohort of veterans with ≥ 1 prior relapse, defined as hospitalization or emergency department visit associated with a schizophrenia diagnosis during the 12-month preindex period, and (2) the nonrelapse cohort of veterans with no evidence of relapse during the preindex period. The frequencies of unemployment, divorce, homelessness, incarceration, and premature death were compared between matched cohorts using standardized mean difference (SMD ≥ 0.1 indicating imbalance).Results: Each cohort included 16,862 veterans (92.0% male, 57.0% White, median age of 58-59 years). In the relapse cohort, 67.4% and 42.0% of veterans had a history of substance use disorder and non-schizophrenia mental health disorder, respectively, compared to 43.5% and 23.8% in the matched nonrelapse cohort (both SMD > 0.1). The relapse cohort had a higher frequency of unemployment (75.4% vs 71.4%), divorce (35.6% vs 33.7%), homelessness (38.9% vs 23.7%), incarceration (0.6% vs 0.4%), and premature death (23.3% vs 16.9%) compared to the nonrelapse cohort (all SMD > 0.1).Conclusions: Schizophrenia relapse is associated with increased adverse societal outcomes in the VHA population.

Unemployment, homelessness, and other societal outcomes in patients with schizophrenia: a real-world retrospective cohort study of the United States Veterans Health Administration database : Societal burden of schizophrenia among US veterans.

BACKGROUND: The burden associated with schizophrenia is substantial. Impacts on the individual, healthcare system, and society may be particularly striking within the veteran population due to the presence of physical and mental health comorbidities. Disease burden is also influenced by a complex interplay between social determinants of health and health disparities. The objective of the current study was to compare non-healthcare societal outcomes between veterans with and without schizophrenia in the United States Veterans Health Administration (VHA). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the VHA database (01/2013-09/2019; study period). Veterans with schizophrenia (≥2 diagnoses of ICD-9295.xx, ICD-10 F20.x, F21, and/or F25.x during the study period) were identified; the index date was the earliest observed schizophrenia diagnosis. Veterans with schizophrenia were propensity score-matched to those without schizophrenia using baseline characteristics. A 12-month baseline and variable follow-up period were applied. The frequency of unemployment, divorce, incarceration, premature death, and homelessness were compared between the matched cohorts using standardized mean difference (SMD). Risk of unemployment and homelessness were estimated using logistic regression models. RESULTS: A total of 102,207 veterans remained in each cohort after matching (91% male; 61% White [per AMA]; median age, 59 years). Among veterans with schizophrenia, 42% had a substance use disorder and 30% had mental health-related comorbidities, compared with 25 and 15%, respectively, of veterans without schizophrenia. Veterans with schizophrenia were more likely to experience unemployment (69% vs. 41%; SMD: 0.81), divorce (35% vs. 28%; SMD: 0.67), homelessness (28% vs. 7%; SMD: 0.57), incarceration (0.4% vs. 0.1%; SMD: 0.47), and premature death (14% vs. 12%; SMD < 0.1) than veterans without schizophrenia. After further adjustments, the risk of unemployment and of homelessness were 5.4 and 4.5 times higher among veterans with versus without schizophrenia. Other predictors of unemployment included Black [per AMA] race and history of substance use disorder; for homelessness, younger age (18-34 years) and history of mental health-related comorbidities were additional predictors. CONCLUSION: A greater likelihood of adverse societal outcomes was observed among veterans with versus without schizophrenia. Given their elevated risk for unemployment and homelessness, veterans with schizophrenia should be a focus of targeted, multifactorial interventions to reduce disease burden.

National and regional description of healthcare measures among adult Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia within the United States.

AIMS: Provide the first national description across the US of variations in healthcare measures in 2018 among Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adult beneficiaries with ≥2 diagnoses for schizophrenia, and continuous enrollment with consistent geographical data in all of 2018 were identified from Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System (T-MSIS) Analytic Files (TAF) data for 45 of 50 states. Antipsychotic (AP) utilization rates, including long-acting injectable APs (LAIs), quality metrics, and all-cause healthcare resource utilization and costs for claims submitted to Medicaid were reported nationally and by state. Pearson correlation evaluated associations between LAI utilization and total healthcare costs at state and county levels. RESULTS: Across the US 688,437 patients with schizophrenia were identified. The AP utilization rate was 51% (state range: 24-77%), while the LAI utilization rate was 13% (range: 4-26%). The proportion of patients adherent to any AP was 56% (range: 19-73%). Within 30 days post-discharge from an inpatient admission, 22% (range: 8-58%) of patients had an outpatient visit, and 12% (range: 4-48%) had a readmission. The proportion of patients with ≥1 inpatient admission and ≥1 emergency room visit was 34% (range: 19-82%) and 45% (range: 20-70%). Per-patient-per-year total healthcare costs averaged $32,920 (range: $717-$93,972). At the county level, a weak negative correlation was observed between LAI utilization and total healthcare costs. LIMITATIONS: This study included Medicaid beneficiaries enrolled with pharmacy and medical benefits, including beneficiaries dually eligible for Medicare; results cannot be generalized to the overall schizophrenia population or those with other payer coverage. CONCLUSIONS: In 2018, half of beneficiaries with schizophrenia did not submit any claims for APs to Medicaid, nearly half had an emergency room visit, and one-third had an inpatient admission. Moreover, healthcare measures varied considerably across states. These findings may indicate unmet treatment needs for Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia.

Schizophrenia is a severe mental disorder that poses a large health, social, and cost burden to patients and society. While treatment with antipsychotic medications can reduce the number of relapses and hospitalizations, many patients do not adhere to treatment, which can lead to poor symptom control and further use of healthcare services. Interestingly, these measures of schizophrenia care seem to vary across US states. Therefore, we ran the first study to describe the regional differences in antipsychotic use, measures of quality of care, healthcare use, and healthcare costs among Medicaid-insured patients across the US in 2018.Our results showed that only half of patients used antipsychotics in 2018 (with a range of 24­77% across states) and the proportion of patients adherent to antipsychotic treatment was low (range of 19­73%). Additionally, nearly half of all patients had an emergency room visit (range of 20­70%), and one-third had an inpatient admission (range of 19­82%). These findings highlight large variations in antipsychotic use, performance measures, and healthcare use, possibly due to regional differences in unmet needs in schizophrenia care for Medicaid-insured patients in the US. Since use of inpatient and emergency room services was consistently high in specific states or regions, and yearly healthcare costs per patient varied from $717­$93,972 (mean = $32,920), there may be a particularly high burden in certain areas of the country where patients with schizophrenia may potentially be experiencing multiple relapses. Further research is needed to identify policies that may help narrow these regional differences.

Healthcare resource utilization and costs before and after long-acting injectable antipsychotic initiation in commercially insured young adults with schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics use is associated with improved adherence which can reduce the rate of relapse, hospitalization, and associated costs in patients with schizophrenia. Young adults could be at higher risk of poor adherence, hence use of LAI in this population may offer a benefit but the evidence is limited. This study aimed to compare clinical and economic outcomes before and after the initiation of LAI antipsychotics in commercially insured young adults (18-35 years of age) with schizophrenia. METHODS: A retrospective claims data study was conducted using the data from the IBM MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters (CCAE) Database. Patients with a continuous enrollment of at least 1-year before and 1-year after the first observed schizophrenia diagnosis (index date) and with the use of ≥1 typical or atypical LAI antipsychotic during the post-index follow-up period were included. A pre-post analysis was conducted to compare relapse rates, healthcare resource utilization, and costs before (from index date to LAI initiation) and after LAI initiation (to end of follow up). RESULTS: A total of 2222 patients who initiated LAIs after an index schizophrenia diagnosis were identified. The per patient per month (PPPM) composite relapse event rate (0.109 pre-LAI to 0.073 post-LAI) and hospitalization rate (0.091 to 0.058), all-cause inpatient visits (0.231 to 0.119), and length of stay (2.694 to 1.092 days) significantly decreased from before LAI initiation to after LAI initiation with similar trends seen for mental health and schizophrenia-related measures (all significant; P < 0.0001). All-cause total costs ($4898 to $3078 PPPM) were also decreased after LAI initiation, with similar trends seen for mental health and schizophrenia-related costs (all significant; P < 0.0001). Although medication costs were higher post-LAI period ($311 to $542 PPPM), the cost increase was substantially offset by the decreased costs associated with total healthcare costs. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with LAI antipsychotics was associated with a decrease in relapse event rate, healthcare resource utilization, and costs after LAI initiation compared to before LAI initiation in commercially insured young adults with schizophrenia. Treatment with LAIs in young adults with schizophrenia is potentially associated with significant cost savings to commercial payers.

Patient-psychiatrist discordance and drivers of prescribing long-acting injectable antipsychotics for schizophrenia management in the real-world: a point-in-time survey.

BACKGROUND: To assess discordance between psychiatrists and their patients with schizophrenia regarding disease management and understand drivers of prescribing long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics. METHODS: Data were collected via the Adelphi Schizophrenia Disease Specific Programme™, a point-in-time real-world international survey of psychiatrists and their consulting patients with schizophrenia, conducted in 2019. Psychiatrists completed an attitudinal survey on schizophrenia management and provided patient profiles for their next 10 adult consulting patients. The same patients voluntarily completed patient self-completion forms. Disease severity and improvement were assessed via physician-reported Clinical Global Impression scale; patients' adherence to treatment was rated through a 3-point scale (1=not at all adherent, 3=fully adherent). RESULTS: Four hundred sixty-six psychiatrists provided data for 4345 patients (1132 receiving a LAI; 3105 on non-LAI treatment; 108 not on treatment). LAIs were more commonly prescribed to patients with severe schizophrenia, with varying reasons for prescribing. Globally, only slight agreement was observed between psychiatrists and patients for Clinical Global Impression severity of illness (κ=0.174) and level of improvement on treatment (κ=0.204). There was moderate agreement regarding level of adherence to treatment (κ=0.524). Reasons for non-adherence did not reach a level of agreement greater than fair. CONCLUSIONS: Our real-world survey found that LAIs were more often reserved for severe schizophrenia patients and improving adherence was a key driver for prescribing. However, compared with the patients themselves, psychiatrists tended to underestimate patients' disease severity and overestimate their adherence.

Systematic literature review of schizophrenia clinical practice guidelines on acute and maintenance management with antipsychotics.

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) translate evidence into recommendations to improve patient care and outcomes. To provide an overview of schizophrenia CPGs, we conducted a systematic literature review of English-language CPGs and synthesized current recommendations for the acute and maintenance management with antipsychotics. Searches for schizophrenia CPGs were conducted in MEDLINE/Embase from 1/1/2004-12/19/2019 and in guideline websites until 06/01/2020. Of 19 CPGs, 17 (89.5%) commented on first-episode schizophrenia (FES), with all recommending antipsychotic monotherapy, but without agreement on preferred antipsychotic. Of 18 CPGs commenting on maintenance therapy, 10 (55.6%) made no recommendations on the appropriate maximum duration of maintenance therapy, noting instead individualization of care. Eighteen (94.7%) CPGs commented on long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs), mainly in cases of nonadherence (77.8%), maintenance care (72.2%), or patient preference (66.7%), with 5 (27.8%) CPGs recommending LAIs for FES. For treatment-resistant schizophrenia, 15/15 CPGs recommended clozapine. Only 7/19 (38.8%) CPGs included a treatment algorithm.