Understanding the patient experience and treatment benefits in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer with brain metastasis.

BACKGROUND: Despite the high prevalence of brain metastases (BM) secondary to non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (NSCLC/BM), patients' experiences (symptoms and impacts) are not fully understood. This study sought to understand the patient experience with NSCLC/BM and identify a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure fit to capture the most important NSCLC/BM symptoms and impacts. METHODS: A targeted literature review was completed; the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN)/Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Brain Symptom Index, 24-item version (NFBrSI-24) was identified as a relevant measure that assessed the core symptoms and impacts associated with NSCLC/BM. Qualitative interviews composed of concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing with oncologists (n = 3) and adult patients (n = 16) with NSCLC/BM were conducted to confirm the content validity and evaluate the relevance and appropriateness of the NFBrSI-24 for this condition. RESULTS: The NSCLC/BM symptoms and impacts identified in the literature and reported by oncologists and patients were consistent and captured in the NFBrSI-24. Study participants reported significant burden associated with the symptoms (commonly fatigue, headache) and impacts of NSCLC/BM. Participants indicated that the NFBrSI-24 captured their most salient experiences with NSCLC/BM and that symptom improvement or a delay in progression, as measured by the NFBrSI-24, would be meaningful. During the cognitive debriefing, participants generally indicated that the NFBrSI-24 was comprehensive and easy to understand/answer and that it assessed symptoms they considered most important to treat. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the NFBrSI-24 adequately captures an appropriate measure of NSCLC/BM symptoms and impact.

Comparability of a provisioned device versus bring your own device for completion of patient-reported outcome measures by participants with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: quantitative study findings.

OBJECTIVE: To quantitatively compare equivalence and compliance of patient-reported outcome (PRO) data collected via provisioned device (PD) versus bring your own device (BYOD). METHODS: Participants with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) completed the EXAcerbations of Chronic Pulmonary Disease Tool (EXACT®) daily and COPD Assessment Test™ (CAT) and Patient Global Impression of Severity (PGIS) of COPD weekly on either PD or BYOD for 15 days, then switched device types for 15 days. EXACT was scored using the Evaluating Respiratory Symptoms in COPD (E-RS®: COPD) algorithm and equivalence assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) adjusting for cross-over sequence, period, and time. Two one-sided tests (TOSTs) used ICC adjusted means with 10%, 20%, and 40% of total score tested as equivalence margins. Compliance and comfort with technology were assessed. Equivalence across 3 device screen sizes was assessed following the second completion period. RESULTS: Participants (N = 64) reported high comfort with technology, with 79.7% reporting being "quite a bit" or "very" comfortable. Weekly compliance was high (BYOD = 89.7-100%; PD = 76.9-100%). CAT and E-RS: COPD scores correlated well with PGIS (r > 0.50) and demonstrated equivalence between PD and BYOD completion (ICC = 0.863-0.908). TOST equivalence was achieved within 10% of the total score (p > 0.05). PRO measure scores were equivalent across 3 different screen sizes (ICC = 0.972-0.989). CONCLUSIONS: Measure completion was high and scores equivalent between PD and BYOD, supporting use of BYOD in addition to PD for collecting PRO data in COPD studies and in demographically diverse patient populations.

Development of an updated, standardized, patient-centered outcome set for lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: In 2016, the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) defined an international consensus recommendation of the most important outcomes for lung cancer patients. The European Health Outcomes Observatory (H2O) initiative aimed to develop an updated patient-centered core outcome set (COS) for lung cancer, to capture the patient perspective of the impact of lung cancer and (novel) treatments using a combination of patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments and clinical data as a means to drive value-based health-care. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An international, expert team of patient representatives, multidisciplinary healthcare professionals, academic researchers and pharmaceutical industry representatives (n = 17) reviewed potential outcomes generated through literature review. A broader group of patients/patient representatives (n = 31), healthcare professionals / academic researchers (n = 83), pharmaceutical industry representatives (n = 26), and health authority representatives (n = 6) participated in a Delphi study. In two survey rounds, participants scored the relevance of outcomes from a preliminary list. The threshold for consensus was defined as ≥ 70 % of participants scoring an outcome as 'highly relevant'. In concluding consensus-meeting rounds, the expert multidisciplinary team finalized the COS. RESULTS: The preliminary list defined by the core group consisted of 102 outcomes and was prioritized in the Delphi procedure to 64. The final lung cancer COS includes: 1) case-mix factors (n = 27); 2) PROs related to health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (n = 25); 3) clinical outcomes (n = 12). Patient-reported symptoms beyond domains included in the ICHOM lung cancer set in 2016 were insomnia, nausea, vomiting, anxiety, depression, lack of appetite, gastric problems, constipation, diarrhoea, dysphagia, and haemoptysis. CONCLUSIONS: We will implement the lung cancer COS in Europe within the H2O initiative by collecting the outcomes through a combination of clinician-reported measures and PRO measures. The COS will support the adoption and reporting of lung cancer measures in a standardized way across Europe and empower patients with lung cancer to better manage their health care.

Comparability of a provisioned device versus bring your own device for completion of patient-reported outcome measures by participants with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: qualitative interview findings.

BACKGROUND: There is interest in participants using their own smartphones or tablets ("bring your own device"; BYOD) to complete patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures in clinical studies. Our study aimed to qualitatively evaluate participants' experience using a provisioned device (PD) versus their own smartphone (BYOD) for this purpose. METHODS: Participants with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were recruited for this observational, cross-over study and completed PRO measures daily on one device type for 15 days, then switched to the other device type to complete the same measures for another 15 days. After each 15-day period, semi-structured interviews were conducted about their experience with the device. RESULTS: Of 64 participants enrolled, the final qualitative analysis populations comprised those who participated in an interview without protocol violations. Thus, the qualitative longitudinal population (LP) included n = 57 (89%), while the qualitative cross-sectional population (CSP) included n = 60 (94%). CSP participants found both device types easy to use. Twenty CSP participants (33%) reported missing data entry on at least one day when using PD, and 24 (40%) reported missing at least one day when using BYOD. In the LP, preference for one of the device types was somewhat evenly split; 45.6% (n = 26) preferred PD and 50.9% (n = 29) preferred BYOD. The most common reason for preferring PD was that it was "dedicated" to the study; the "convenience" of carrying a single device was the main reason for preferring BYOD. CONCLUSION: The findings from the interviews demonstrated few differences in participants' experience completing PRO measures on a PD versus BYOD. Our study supports the use of BYOD as a potential addition to PD for collecting PRO data and contributes evidence that BYOD may be employed to collect PRO data in demographically diverse patient populations.

Qualitative research with patients and caregivers of patients with PIK3CA related overgrowth spectrum: content validity of clinical outcome assessments.

BACKGROUND: PIK3CA-Related Overgrowth Spectrum (PROS) are rare syndromes caused by a mutation in the PIK3CA gene, including fibroadipose hyperplasia or overgrowth; congenital lipomatous overgrowth, vascular malformations, epidermal nevi, scoliosis/skeletal and spinal (CLOVES); megalencephaly-capillary malformation (MCAP or M-CM); fibro-adipose vascular anomaly (FAVA); Klippel-Trenaunay syndrome (KT; also known as, Klippel-Trenaunay-Weber syndrome); capillary, lymphatic, and venous malformations (CLVM); and lymphatic malformation (LM). Characterized by malformations and tissue overgrowth, PROS manifests at birth or in early childhood. Pain and functional limitations associated with these conditions may greatly impact the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of persons with PROS including physical functioning, work/school, social functioning, and emotional well-being. RESULTS: Selected clinical outcome assessments (COAs), identified during a literature review, were tested with adults with PROS, and children with PROS and their caregivers to determine comprehensibility, relevance, and appropriateness for measuring symptom severity and HRQoL. Tested were the Patient Global Impression of Symptom Severity (PGI-S), Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), Wong-Baker FACES, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Profile, PROMIS Pediatric Short Form Sleep Disturbance, and PROMIS Dyspnea Severity. Qualitative interviews tested the self-report adult, self-report pediatric, and observer-report COAs with adults with PROS, and children with PROS and their caregivers. Ten adults (≥ 18 years old) with PROS, and 20 children (6-17 years old) with PROS and their caregivers, participated. All reported positive feedback on item relevance. Adults and children over the age of 12 comprehended and responded to self-reported items. Secondary objectives examined the age children could self-report their conditions using pediatric versions and assessed available observer-report versions of the COAs with caregivers. Some participants under the age of 12 had trouble understanding some terminology. Further, adults and children with cognitive impairment associated with MCAP/M-CM sometimes had difficulty with self-report. Caregivers were able to report their child's symptoms and impacts using observer-report COAs. Participant feedback prompted further consideration of the measurement of pain in this population, including variability of pain over time, location of pain, and type. CONCLUSIONS: This study provided valuable information from patients about PROS, supporting the content validity of the COAs, with recommended revisions. COAs are easily understood by persons with PROS and caregivers and are appropriate for measuring symptoms and disease-related impacts across diverse PROS syndromes in clinical trials.

Best Practice Recommendations: User Acceptance Testing for Systems Designed to Collect Clinical Outcome Assessment Data Electronically.

Implementing clinical outcome assessments electronically in clinical studies requires the sponsor and electronic clinical outcome assessment (eCOA) provider to work closely together to implement study-specific requirements and ensure consensus-defined best practices are followed. One of the most important steps is for sponsors to conduct user acceptance testing (UAT) using an eCOA system developed by the eCOA provider. UAT provides the clinical study team including sponsor or designee an opportunity to evaluate actual software performance and ensure that the sponsor's intended requirements were communicated clearly and accurately translated into the system design, and that the system conforms to a sponsor-approved requirements document based on the study protocol. The components of an eCOA system, such as the study-specific application, customization features, study portal, and custom data transfers should be tested during UAT. While the provider will perform their own system validation, the sponsor or designee should also perform their due diligence by conducting UAT. A clear UAT plan including the necessary documentation may be requested by regulatory authorities depending on the country. This paper provides the electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) Consortium's and patient-reported outcome (PRO) Consortium's best practice recommendations for clinical study sponsors or their designee for conducting UAT with support from eCOA providers to ensure data quality and enhance operational efficiency of the eCOA system. Following these best practice recommendations and completing UAT in its entirety will support a high quality eCOA system and ensure more reliable and complete data are collected, which are essential to the success of the study.

Direct Costs of Opioid Abuse in an Insured Population in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To (a) describe the demographics of opioid abusers; (b) compare the prevalence rates of selected comorbidities and the medical and drug utilization patterns of opioid abusers with patients from a control group, for the period from 1998 to 2002; and (c) calculate the mean annual per-patient total health care costs (e.g., inpatient, outpatient, emergency room, drug, other) from the perspective of a private payer. METHODS: An administrative database of medical and pharmacy claims from 1998 to 2002 of 16 self-insured employer health plans with approximately 2 million lives was used to identify "opioid abusers"-patients with claims associated with ICD-9-CM (International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification) codes for opioid abuse (304.0, 304.7, 305.5, and 965.0 [excluding 965.01]). A control group of nonabusers was selected using a matched sample (by age, gender, employment status, and census region) in a 3:1 ratio. Per-patient annual health care costs (mean total medical and drug costs) were measured in 2003 U.S. dollars. Multivariate regression techniques were also used to control for comorbidities and to compare costs with a benchmark of depressed patients. RESULTS: 740 patients were identified as opioid abusers, a prevalence of 8 in 10,000 persons aged 12 to 64 years continuously enrolled in health care plans for whom 12 months of data were available for calculating costs. Opioid abusers, compared with nonabusers, had significantly higher prevalence rates for a number of specific comorbidities, including nonopioid poisoning, hepatitis (A, B, or C), psychiatric illnesses, and pancreatitis, which were approximately 78, 36, 9, and 21 (P<0.01) times higher, respectively, compared with nonabusers. Opioid abusers also had higher levels of medical and prescription drug utilization. Almost 60% of opioid abusers had prescription drug claims for opioids compared with approximately 20% for nonabusers. Prevalence rates for hospital inpatient visits for opioid abusers were more than 12 times higher compared with nonabusers (P<0.01). Mean annual direct health care costs for opioid abusers were more than 8 times higher than for nonabusers ($15,884 versus $1,830, respectively, P < 0.01). Hospital inpatient and physician-outpatient costs accounted for 46% ($7,239) and 31% ($5,000) of opioid abusers' health care costs, compared with 17% ($310) and 50% ($906), respectively, for nonabusers. Mean drug costs for opioid abusers were more than 5 times higher than costs for nonabusers ($2,034 vs. $386, respectively, P<0.01), driven by higher drug utilization (including opioids) for opioid abusers. Even when controlling for comorbidities using a multivariate regression model of a matched control of depressed patients, the average health care costs of opioid abusers were 1.8 times higher than the average health care costs of depressed patients. CONCLUSION: The high costs of opioid abuse were driven primarily by high prevalence rates of costly comorbidites and high utilization rates of medical services and prescription drugs. DISCLOSURES: Funding for this research was provided by an unrestricted grant from Janssen Medical Affairs, L.L.C. and was obtained by authors Susan Vallow and Jeff Schein, who are employed by Janssen Medical Affairs, L.L.C. Nathaniel Katz is a consultant to Janssen and numerous other pharmaceutical companies that manufacture branded opioid products and nonopioid analgesics; authors Alan G. White, Howard G. Birnbaum, Milena N. Mareva, and Maham Daher disclose no potential bias or conflict of interest relating to this article. White served as principal author of the study. Study concept and design were contributed primarily by White, Vallow, Schein, and Katz. Analysis and interpretation of data were contributed by all authors. Drafting of the manuscript was primarily the work of White, and its critical revision was the work of White and Vallow. Statistical expertise was contributed by White, Birnbaum, and Daher, and administrative, technical, and/or material support was provided by Analysis Group, Inc., Boston, MA.

Development of Focal Segmental Glomerulosclerosis Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Symptom Diary and Symptom Impact Questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS) is a kidney disease that affects patients' functioning and well-being. This study aimed to develop patient-reported outcome questionnaires to measure patient experiences related to FSGS. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative patient interviews to identify important symptoms and concepts (concept elicitation) formed the basis for the development of 2 questionnaires, one on symptoms and one on their impact. Additional qualitative interviews were implemented to evaluate/refine the questionnaires (cognitive debriefing). Transcripts of concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews, conducted by telephone, were analyzed for concepts of interest using qualitative text analysis. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Patients with FSGS (aged 18-65 years with estimated glomerular filtration rates ≥ 40mL/min/1.73m2) whose disease remained inadequately controlled after 2 or fewer courses of treatment. METHODOLOGY: Qualitative concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Interview transcripts were analyzed using qualitative software, MAXQDA. RESULTS: 30 patients completed concept elicitation interviews; 9 patients completed cognitive debriefing interviews. Frequently mentioned symptoms included swelling from the waist down/legs/knees/feet/ankles (67%), fatigue (57%), stomach/abdomen swelling (43%), body pain/pressure (30%), and shortness of breath (20%), as well as impacts on physical (52%), emotional (68%), and social functioning (89%). Based on analyses of interview transcripts and clinical input, 2 questionnaires, one on symptoms and one on the impact of the symptom, were drafted. The 23-item FSGS Symptom Diary (assessing the frequency and severity of FSGS symptoms during the past 24 hours) and the FSGS Symptom Impact Questionnaire (17 items assessing interference with activities and emotions during the past 7 days) were iteratively revised based on cognitive debriefing interviews. LIMITATIONS: The study was restricted to English-speaking adults located in the United States, and the concept elicitation interview group had a low number of African Americans. CONCLUSIONS: The FSGS Symptom Diary and FSGS Symptom Impact Questionnaire are new FSGS-specific patient-reported outcomes measures designed to support a comprehensive assessment of symptoms and symptom impact in adults with FSGS. Future research is needed to evaluate their quantitative measurement properties.

BAT117213: Ileal bile acid transporter (IBAT) inhibition as a treatment for pruritus in primary biliary cirrhosis: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Pruritus (itch) is a symptom commonly experienced by patients with cholestatic liver diseases such as primary biliary cholangitis (PBC, previously referred to as primary biliary cirrhosis). Bile acids (BAs) have been proposed as potential pruritogens in PBC. The ileal bile acid transporter (IBAT) protein expressed in the distal ileum plays a key role in the enterohepatic circulation of BAs. Pharmacological inhibition of IBAT with GSK2330672 may reduce BA levels in the systemic circulation and improve pruritus. METHODS: This clinical study (BAT117213 study) is sponsored by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) with associated exploratory studies supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). It is a phase 2a, multi-centre, randomised, double bind, placebo controlled, cross-over trial for PBC patients with pruritus. The primary objective is to investigate the safety and tolerability of repeat doses of GSK2330672, and explore whether GSK2330672 administration for 14 days improves pruritus compared with placebo. The key outcomes include improvement in pruritus scores evaluated on a numerical rating scale and other PBC symptoms in an electronic diary completed twice daily by the patients. The secondary outcomes include the evaluation of the effect of GSK2330672 on total serum bile acid (BA) concentrations, serum markers of BA synthesis and steady-state pharmacokinetics of ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA). DISCUSSION: BAT117213 study is the first randomised controlled crossover trial of ileal bile acid transporter inhibitor, a novel class of drug to treat pruritus in PBC. The main strengths of the trial are utility of a novel, study specific, electronic symptom diary as patient reported outcome to measure the treatment response objectively and the crossover design that allows estimating the treatment effect in a smaller number of patients. The outcome of this trial will inform the trial design of future development phase of the IBAT inhibitor drug. The trial will also provide opportunity to conduct metabonomic and gut microbiome studies as explorative and mechanistic research in patients with cholestatic pruritus. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT number: 2012-005531-84, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01899703 , registered on 3(rd) July 2013.

Direct costs of opioid abuse in an insured population in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To (a) describe the demographics of opioid abusers; (b) compare the prevalence rates of selected comorbidities and the medical and drug utilization patterns of opioid abusers with patients from a control group, for the period from 1998 to 2002; and (c) calculate the mean annual per-patient total health care costs (e.g., inpatient, outpatient, emergency room, drug, other) from the perspective of a private payer. METHODS: An administrative database of medical and pharmacy claims from 1998 to 2002 of 16 self-insured employer health plans with approximately 2 million lives was used to identify "opioid abusers"--patients with claims associated with ICD-9-CM (International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification) codes for opioid abuse (304.0, 304.7, 305.5, and 965.0 [excluding 965.01]). A control group of nonabusers was selected using a matched sample (by age, gender, employment status, and census region) in a 3:1 ratio. Per-patient annual health care costs (mean total medical and drug costs) were measured in 2003 U.S. dollars. Multivariate regression techniques were also used to control for comorbidities and to compare costs with a benchmark of depressed patients. RESULTS: 740 patients were identified as opioid abusers, a prevalence of 8 in 10,000 persons aged 12 to 64 years continuously enrolled in health care plans for whom 12 months of data were available for calculating costs. Opioid abusers, compared with nonabusers, had significantly higher prevalence rates for a number of specific comorbidities, including nonopioid poisoning, hepatitis (A, B, or C), psychiatric illnesses, and pancreatitis, which were approximately 78, 36, 9, and 21 (P<0.01) times higher, respectively, compared with nonabusers. Opioid abusers also had higher levels of medical and prescription drug utilization. Almost 60% of opioid abusers had prescription drug claims for opioids compared with approximately 20% for nonabusers. Prevalence rates for hospital inpatient visits for opioid abusers were more than 12 times higher compared with nonabusers (P<0.01). Mean annual direct health care costs for opioid abusers were more than 8 times higher than for nonabusers ($15,884 versus $1,830, respectively, P < 0.01). Hospital inpatient and physician-outpatient costs accounted for 46% ($7,239) and 31% ($5,000) of opioid abusers. health care costs, compared with 17% ($310) and 50% ($906), respectively, for nonabusers. Mean drug costs for opioid abusers were more than 5 times higher than costs for nonabusers ($2,034 vs. $386, respectively, P<0.01), driven by higher drug utilization (including opioids) for opioid abusers. Even when controlling for comorbidities using a multivariate regression model of a matched control of depressed patients, the average health care costs of opioid abusers were 1.8 times higher than the average health care costs of depressed patients. CONCLUSION: The high costs of opioid abuse were driven primarily by high prevalence rates of costly comorbidites and high utilization rates of medical services and prescription drugs.

Validation of the Restless Legs Syndrome Quality of Life questionnaire.

OBJECTIVES: The Restless Legs Syndrome Quality of Life questionnaire (RLSQoL) assesses the impact of RLS on daily life, emotional well-being, social life, and work life. This study investigates its validity and reliability. METHODS: The RLSQoL was tested in 85 American adults with primary RLS. Patients were also asked to rate symptom severity with the International Restless Legs Scale (patient-reported version) and report on changes in symptoms over the 2-week period. RESULTS: The RLSQoL summary scale score (range: 0-100) demonstrated acceptable internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.92) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.84). All items indicated acceptable item-convergent validity. The RLSQoL distinguished between groups with mild, moderate, and severe symptoms (F = 52.22, P < 0.0001). It demonstrated preliminary responsiveness to changes in RLS status over 2 weeks (effect size: improvement, 0.25; deterioration, -0.32), indicating moderate scale changes consistent with the small clinical change over this time. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the conceptual framework of the RLSQoL. It is a valid and reliable measure of the impact of RLS on QoL and is responsive to short-term changes in symptom severity. The RLSQoL appears to be an appropriate tool for trial-based assessments of treatments for RLS.

Neuropsychological effects of long-term opioid use in chronic pain patients.

Opioids are thought to worsen the performance of psychomotor tasks due to their sedating and mental-clouding effects. As a result, some safety regulations currently restrict the use of opioids when driving or using heavy equipment. We investigated the psychomotor effects of long-term opioid use in 144 patients with low back pain. All subjects were administered two neuropsychological tests (Digit Symbol and Trail Making Test-B) before being prescribed opioids for pain; tests were re-administered at 90- and 180-day intervals. Test scores significantly improved while subjects were taking opioids for pain, which suggests that long-term use of oxycodone with acetaminophen or transdermal fentanyl does not significantly impair cognitive ability or psychomotor function.

The direct cost of care for psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Relatively little information is available in the literature concerning the cost of psoriasis in the United States, and much of that information is out of date. OBJECTIVE: The present analyses estimate the direct cost of medical care for psoriasis (including psoriatic arthritis) from a societal perspective among adults in the United States. METHOD AND DATA: The costs of hospitalizations, outpatient and physician office visits, prescription and over-the-counter (OTC) medications, and medical procedures were estimated from the literature, analysis of publicly available health databases (Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, National Hospital Discharge Survey, Medicare Public Use Files, National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, and the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey), and analysis of privately available health databases (United Health Care/Diversified Pharmaceutical Services, the Medstat Group diagnosis-related group guide, and the National Disease and Therapeutic Index). Costs were expressed as of 1997 by using Medicare and health maintenance organization reimbursement rates and wholesale drug costs. Costs of OTC medications were derived by adjusting a previous estimate in the literature for inflation in over-the-counter drugs and population increases. RESULTS: The cost of illness for the approximately 1.4 million individuals with clinically significant disease is substantial-approximately $30.5 million for hospitalizations, $86.6 million for outpatient physician visits, $27.4 million for photochemotherapy, $147.9 million for dermatologic prescription drugs, and $357.2 million for OTC drugs, for a total direct cost of $649.6 million. CONCLUSION: Cost estimates from this study are substantially less than those found in previous studies ($1.09 billion and $4.32 billion after adjustment of estimates in the literature for medical inflation and population increases). This appears to be principally a result of decreases in hospitalization rates since 1979 and the valuation methodology per unit of medical services (with prior studies using "list" prices and the current study using reimbursement rates).