Estimating the Economic Burden of Rheumatoid Arthritis in Taiwan Using the National Health Insurance Database.

BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic autoimmune disease characterized by inflammation and destruction of the joints. OBJECTIVES: This research aims to estimate the economic burden of RA in Taiwan. METHODS: The National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD), a claims-based dataset encompassing 99 % of Taiwan's population, was applied. We used a micro-costing approach for direct healthcare costs and indirect social costs by estimating the quantities and prices of cost categories. Direct costs included surgeries, hospitalizations, medical devices and materials, laboratory tests, and drugs. The costs and quantities of the direct economic burden were calculated based on 2011 data of NHIRD. We identified RA patients and a control cohort matched 1:4 on demographic and clinical covariates to calculate the incremental cost related to RA. Indirect costs were evaluated by missed work (absenteeism) and worker productivity (presenteeism). For the indirect burden, we estimated the rate of absenteeism and presenteeism from a patient survey. Costs were presented in US dollars (US$1 = 30 TWD). RESULTS: A total of 41,269 RA patients were included in the database with incremental total direct cost of US$86,413,971 and indirect cost of US$138,492,987. This resulted in an average incremental direct cost of US$2050 per RA patient. Within direct costs, the largest burdens were associated with drugs (US$73,028,944), laboratory tests (US$6,132,395), and hospitalizations (US$3,208,559). For indirect costs, absenteeism costs and presenteeism costs were US$16,059,681 and US$114,291,687, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The economic burden of RA in Taiwan is driven by indirect healthcare costs, most notably presenteeism.

Risk of tuberculosis, serious infection and lymphoma with disease-modifying biologic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis patients in Taiwan.

AIM: To determine the risk of adverse events in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients treated with biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARD) versus traditional DMARDs (tDMARD). METHOD: This retrospective study used Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database to capture data for adult patients diagnosed with RA between 1 January 1999 and 31 December 2009 and treated with tDMARD or bDMARD. The endpoints were patients with cases of an inpatient serious bacterial infection (SBI), diagnosis of tuberculosis (TB) or lymphoma. Within the bDMARD cohort, individual bDMARDS with adequate data were also compared (adalimumab and etanercept). Propensity-score matching was used to adjust for significant (P ≤ 0.05) patient characteristics. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) of SBI/TB/lymphoma cases versus non-cases were adjusted for exposure time (rate per 100,000 patient-years) and 95% confidence intervals were constructed to assess whether IRRs differed from 1.0. RESULTS: Of 34,947 potential patients, 7888 tDMARD, 3459 bDMARD (including 1492 etanercept and 746 adalimumab) patients were matched for analysis. A total of 2150 cases were identified and of these 1711 were SBI, 406 as TB and 33 as lymphoma. For all cases except SBI, the IRR (95% CI) was higher for bDMARD versus tDMARD (SBI 1.04 [0.89-1.19]; TB 2.67 [2.12-3.34]; lymphoma 3.24 [1.37-7.06]). Excepting lymphoma, IRR was higher for adalimumab versus etanercept (SBI 1.83 [1.19-2.77]; TB 2.35 [1.29-4.15]; lymphoma 1.49 [0.03-18.66]). CONCLUSIONS: There was a higher risk for specified infections and lymphoma with bDMARD versus tDMARD and adalimumab versus etanercept.

A retrospective study to assess the epidemiological and economic burden of pneumococcal diseases in adults aged 50 years and older in Taiwan.

OBJECTIVE: Invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) and pneumococcal pneumonia cause substantial morbidity and mortality worldwide. This retrospective study was conducted to estimate the disease burden from pneumococcal disease in older adults in Taiwan from a health insurer's perspective. METHODS: Data for the years 2002-2009 from patients aged ≥50 years with insurance records indicating pneumococcal meningitis, pneumococcal bacteremia, or hospitalized or outpatient pneumonia were obtained from the National Health Insurance Research Database in Taiwan. Admission data for inpatients, visit data for outpatients, and associated costs were extracted from the database to estimate the incidence, case fatality rates, and direct and indirect costs of pneumococcal disease episodes. These data were applied to the estimated population of Taiwan in 2010 to provide an estimated disease burden for a single year from the payer perspective. RESULTS: The average incidence per 100,000 person years was 2.4 for IPD, 278.8 for hospitalized pneumococcal pneumonia, and 1376.4 for outpatient pneumococcal pneumonia. The average case fatality rate was 12.3% for IPD and 10.0% for hospitalized pneumonia. Hospitalized pneumonia accounted for over 90% of direct medical costs. The incidence of hospitalized pneumococcal pneumonia per 100,000 person years was 84.4 for adults of 50-64 years, 313.1 for adults of 65-74 years, 820.3 for adults of 75-84 years, and 1650.9 for adults of 85+ year of age. In 2010, it was estimated there were over 113,000 episodes of pneumococcal disease, causing almost 2000 deaths, with direct medical costs of more than NT$3.4 billion annually. CONCLUSIONS: Pneumococcal disease is a significant cause of mortality and excess healthcare expense among the elderly in Taiwan. Disease burden in older adults increases with advancing age.

Does framing of cancer survival affect perceived value of care? A willingness-to-pay survey of US residents.

AIMS: To investigate the relationship between the framing of survival gains and the perceived value of cancer care. METHODS: Through a population-based survey of 2040 US adults, respondents were randomized to one of the two sets of hypothetical scenarios, each of which described the survival benefit for a new treatment as either an increase in median survival time (median survival), or an increase in the probability of survival for a given length of time (landmark survival). Each respondent was presented with two randomly selected scenarios with different prognosis and survival improvements, and asked about their willingness to pay (WTP) for the new treatments. RESULTS: Predicted WTP increased with survival benefits and respondents' income, regardless of how survival benefits were described. Framing therapeutic benefits as improvements in landmark rather than median time survival increased the proportion of the population willing to pay for that gain by 11-35%, and the mean WTP amount by 42-72% in the scenarios we compared. CONCLUSION: How survival benefits are described may influence the value people place on cancer care.

When is cancer care cost-effective? A systematic overview of cost-utility analyses in oncology.

New cancer treatments pose a substantial financial burden on health-care systems, insurers, patients, and society. Cost-utility analyses (CUAs) of cancer-related interventions have received increased attention in the medical literature and are being used to inform reimbursement decisions in many health-care systems. We identified and reviewed 242 cancer-related CUAs published through 2007 and included in the Tufts Medical Center Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry (www.cearegistry.org). Leading cancer types studied were breast (36% of studies), colorectal (12%), and hematologic cancers (10%). Studies have examined interventions for tertiary prevention (73% of studies), secondary prevention (19%), and primary prevention (8%). We present league tables by disease categories that consist of a description of the intervention, its comparator, the target population, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. The median reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (in 2008 US $) were $27,000 for breast cancer, $22,000 for colorectal cancer, $34,500 for prostate cancer, $32,000 for lung cancer, and $48,000 for hematologic cancers. The results highlight the many opportunities for efficient investment in cancer care across different cancer types and interventions and the many investments that are inefficient. Because we found only modest improvement in the quality of studies, we suggest that journals provide specific guidance for reporting CUA and assure that authors adhere to guidelines for conducting and reporting economic evaluations.

30 years of pharmaceutical cost-utility analyses: growth, diversity and methodological improvement.

To review and critically evaluate published cost-utility analyses (CUAs) pertaining to pharmaceuticals for the past 3 decades. We examined data from the Tufts Medical Center Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry (www.cearegistry.org), which contains detailed information on English-language CUAs and their ratios (in $US, year 2008 values) published in peer-reviewed journals. We summarized study features using descriptive statistics for articles published from 1976 to 2006. Changes in study methodology over time were analysed by trend test. Analysis of ratios was restricted to those published from 2000 to 2006 from studies that correctly discounted future costs and benefits. Factors associated with having a favourable value (defined to be more than the median for all included ratios) were identified by logistic regression. Of 1393 CUAs published through 2006, 640 (45.9%) pertained to pharmaceuticals. The proportion of CUAs that focussed on pharmaceuticals increased from 34% for the period 1990-5 to 47% for the period 2001-5. Investigations with a US perspective accounted for 51% of all CUAs, although this proportion has decreased over time. The UK perspective investigations accounted for nearly 16% of all studies, and this portion has increased over time. About 24% of all CUAs were sponsored by industry, 48% were sponsored by non-industry sources, and 28% did not disclose their funding. Adherence to good methodological practices is roughly similar for studies with industry and non-industry sponsorship. Adherence to these practices has increased over time. Among the 1969 ratios meeting our inclusion criteria, the median value was $US22 000 per QALY. Logistic regression revealed that, while controlling for the intervention category (e.g. pharmaceutical, medical device, screening), ratios were more likely to be favourable if they were from studies sponsored by a pharmaceutical or device manufacturer (OR 1.53; 95% CI 1.07, 2.19). Ratios for pharmaceutical CUAs were less favourable than other ratios while controlling for sponsorship (OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.44, 0.98). The number of published pharmaceutical CUAs has grown steadily and accounts for almost half of all published CUAs. Adherence to good methodological practices does not appear to differ by study sponsor. Ratios from industry-sponsored studies are more favourable than other ratios. The results highlight that there are many opportunities for efficient healthcare investment, among pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical interventions, just as there are many investments that are inefficient.