Real-world costs of ischemic stroke by discharge status.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to estimate the acute healthcare costs of ischemic stroke during hospitalization and the quarterly all-cause healthcare costs for the first year after discharge by discharge status. METHODS: Adult patients with a hospitalization with a diagnosis of ischemic stroke (ICD-9-CM: 434.xx or 436.xx) between 1 January 2006 and 31 March 2015 were identified from a large US commercial claims database. Patients were classified into three cohorts based on their discharge status from the first stroke hospitalization, i.e. dead at discharge, discharged with disability, or discharged without disability. Third-party (medical and pharmacy) and out-of-pocket costs were adjusted to 2015 USD. RESULTS: A total of 7919 patients dead at discharge, 45,695 patients discharged with disability, and 153,778 patients discharged without disability were included in this analysis. The overall average age was 59.7 years and 52.3% were male. During hospitalization, mean total costs (third-party and out-of-pocket) were $68,370 for patients dead at discharge, $73,903 for patients discharged with disability, and $24,448 for patients discharged without disability (p < .001 for each pairwise comparison); mean third-party costs were $63,605 for patients dead at discharge, $67,861 for patients discharged with disability and $19,267 for patients discharged without disability (p < .001 for each pairwise comparison). During the first year after discharge, mean total costs for patients discharged with disability vs. without disability were $46,850 vs. $30,132 (p < .001). Mean third-party costs for patients discharged with disability vs. without disability were $19,116 vs. $10,976 during the first quarter after discharge, $10,236 vs. $6926 during the second quarter, $8241 vs. $5810 during the third quarter, and $6875 vs. $5292 during the fourth quarter (p < .001 for each quarter). CONCLUSION: The results demonstrated the high economic burden of ischemic stroke, especially among patients discharged with disability with the highest costs incurred during the inpatient stays.

Comparative efficacy of biological treatments for moderate-to-severe psoriasis: a network meta-analysis adjusting for cross-trial differences in reference arm response.

BACKGROUND: Multiple biological therapies are approved for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis. OBJECTIVES: To assess the short-term efficacy of biological treatments for moderate-to-severe psoriasis via a network meta-analysis that adjusts for reference arm response rates. METHODS: Fifteen randomized trials of biological treatments for moderate-to-severe psoriasis were identified. Rates of response, assessed as 50%, 75% and 90% reductions in the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI), were compared using a network meta-analysis. To account for variation across trials, the model was adjusted for placebo responses, the relevance of which was assessed by testing its statistical significance, impact on model fit, and extent to which lack of adjustment confounded the efficacy estimates for biologics. RESULTS: Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 75 response rates for placebo arms ranged from 1·8% to 18·9%. The probability of achieving a PASI 75 response was 80·5% [95% credible interval (CrI) 74·8-85·7] with infliximab 5 mg kg(-1) ; 72·5% (95% CI 66·1-78·3) with ustekinumab 90 mg; 67·5% (95% CI 60·7-73·9) with ustekinumab 45 mg; 66·2% (95% CI 57·3-73·3) with adalimumab 40 mg; 51·9% (95% CI 45·7-58·4) with etanercept 50 mg; and 38·0% (95% CI 31·6-45·1) with etanercept 25 mg. Infliximab had the highest PASI 75 response. Adalimumab and both ustekinumab doses had significantly higher PASI 75 responses than both etanercept doses. There were no significant differences among adalimumab and ustekinumab doses. CONCLUSIONS: A model adjusted for reference arm response rates was found to fit clinical trial data significantly better than unadjusted models.