Modeling the potential impact of abuse-deterrent opioids on medical resource utilization.

Objectives: To extend a previously published manuscript on a model for estimating potential avoided medical events and cost savings in the US associated with the introduction of extended-release abuse-deterrent opioids and incorporate new methods of evaluating abuse deterrence using human abuse potential studies. Methods: A model was developed to estimate reductions in abuse-related events and annual savings in the US. Model inputs included: opioid abuse prevalence, abuse-deterrent opioid cost and effectiveness at deterring abuse, and opioid abuse-related events and costs. Direct (medical and drug) and indirect (work loss) cost savings (2017 US$) and abuse-related events were estimated assuming the replacement of the entire extended-release opioid market (brand and generic) by brand abuse-deterrent opioids. Results: Replacing the extended-release opioid market with abuse-deterrent opioids is estimated to lower annual abuse-related medical events by ∼13-31% (e.g. 78,000-186,000 emergency department visits) and lower annual medical costs by ∼$640 M-$1,538 M, depending on the abuse-deterrent technology (physical/chemical barrier or agonist/antagonist). Replacement of extended-release oxycodone with extended-release abuse-deterrent oxycodone is associated with the largest amount of cost savings and highest number of avoided medical events, followed by replacing extended-release morphine with an extended-release abuse-deterrent opioid. Replacement of transdermal fentanyl is associated with the smallest amount of cost savings and lowest number of avoided medical events. Conclusion: Agonist/antagonist abuse-deterrent opioid technology is associated with higher annual medical cost savings and more avoided events than physical/chemical barrier technology. Total net savings are dependent upon the abuse-deterrent opioid price relative to non-abuse-deterrent opioids.

Opioid Abuse: A Detailed Examination of Cost Drivers over a 24-Month Follow-up Period.

BACKGROUND: Previous work has documented the considerable economic burden associated with opioid abuse, dependence, and overdose/poisoning (hereafter, "abuse"). Recent analyses have provided insights into the trajectory and drivers of the excess costs of abuse both before and after diagnosis, showing the important role of other substance abuse, mental health issues, and painful conditions. OBJECTIVE: To build on the recently published study by Kirson et al. (2017) and extend its findings by (a) evaluating the trajectory of excess costs of abuse for an additional year after an incident abuse diagnosis and (b) exploring the diagnosis-level drivers of excess costs over time in greater detail. METHODS: Using administrative medical and pharmacy claims, which included payment amounts, for beneficiaries covered by large self-insured companies throughout the United States, abusers were matched to controls using the same methods as in Kirson et al. Excess health care costs were assessed over a 24-month follow-up period, which comprised the 6 months before the initial abuse diagnosis and the 18 months after. Drivers of excess costs were then evaluated by diagnosis (grouped at the 3-digit ICD-9-CM level). RESULTS: This study analyzed 9,345 matched pairs of abusers and non-abusers. Similar to the previous study, mean per-patient excess health care costs were found to rise considerably leading up to and shortly after the incident diagnosis of abuse, reaching $15,764 over the first half of the follow-up period. Over the newly extended follow-up period (months 6 to 18 after diagnosis), excess costs remained elevated ($7,346) and did not return to baseline levels. Over time, an increasing share of excess costs was observed for outpatient services and prescription drug use, relative to acute care settings. A detailed examination of cost drivers suggested elevated costs in several clinical categories (e.g., gastrointestinal, respiratory conditions) beyond those previously identified. CONCLUSIONS: This research finds that the excess medical costs of abuse extend for at least 1 more year than previously documented, reflecting the need for considerable follow-up care over time. The identification of several other clinical categories with elevated excess costs suggests important areas for future research into the interaction of opioid abuse with the management of other conditions. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Purdue Pharma. Howard was an employee of Purdue Pharma at the time that this study was conducted. Kirson, Scarpati, Jia, and Wen are employees of Analysis Group, which received funding from Purdue Pharma to conduct this study. Study concept and design were contributed by Kirson, Scarpati, and Howard, along with Jia and Wen. Jia and Wen took the lead in data collection, with assistance from Scarpati and Kirson. Data interpretation was performed by Scarpati, Kirson, and Howard, with assistance from Jia and Wen. The manuscript was written and revised by Scarpati, Kirson, and Howard.

Drivers of excess costs of opioid abuse among a commercially insured population.

OBJECTIVES: To replicate and extend a recently published analysis of the drivers of excess costs of opioid abuse. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective data analysis using de-identified claims data from the Truven MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounter database. METHODS: Medical and prescription drug claims from beneficiaries covered by large self-insured US companies were used to select patients with incident diagnoses of opioid abuse between 2012 and 2015. Two cohorts, abusers and nonabusers, were matched using propensity score methods. Excess healthcare costs were estimated over a 6-month baseline period and 12-month follow-up period. Cost drivers were assessed by diagnosis (3-digit International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification groupings) and place of service. RESULTS: The analysis included 73,714 matched pairs of abusers and nonabusers. Relative to nonabusers, abusers had considerably higher annual healthcare costs of $10,989 per patient, or $1.98 per member per month. Excess costs were similar, yet lower, than the previous analysis using another commercial claims database. In both analyses, a ramp-up in excess costs was observed prior to the incident abuse diagnosis, followed by a decline post diagnosis, although not to baseline levels. Key drivers of excess costs in the 2 studies included opioid use disorders, nonopioid substance misuse, and painful and mental health conditions. From 2010 to 2014, the prevalence of diagnosed opioid abuse doubled, with incidence rates exhibiting an increasing, though flatter, trend than earlier in the period. CONCLUSIONS: Opioid abuse imposes a considerable economic burden on payers. Many abusers have complex healthcare needs and may require care beyond that which is required to treat opioid abuse. These results are robust and consistent across different data sources.