Healthcare costs, resource utilization, and productivity loss associated with colorectal cancer screening.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate healthcare costs, resource utilization, associated costs, and lost productivity for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in an average-risk population. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study identified average-risk individuals (50-75 years) with claims in the Optum Research Database for CRC screening test between 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2018. Index date was defined as the first date of a claim for colonoscopy, fecal immunochemical test (FIT), guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (FOBT) or multi-target stool DNA test (mt-sDNA). Screening costs were evaluated with descriptive statistics and multivariable analyses, adjusting for patient characteristics and index screening costs. RESULTS: In total, 903,831 individuals were identified by test groups: mt-sDNA (n = 29,614), FIT (n = 254,002), guaiac-based FOBT (n = 112,757) and colonoscopy (n = 507,458). Adjusted costs for index screening were, colonoscopy ($3,029), mt-sDNA ($752), FIT ($45), and (FOBT ($153). Adjusted costs across the six months following the index screening were $146 for colonoscopy, $329 for mt-sDNA, $306 for FIT, and $412 for FOBT. Colonoscopy had the highest costs for lost productivity. CONCLUSIONS: Screening colonoscopy had the highest productivity loss and healthcare costs up-front, suggesting potential cost benefits for noninvasive screening modalities. The more frequent screening interval required for FIT and FOBT resulted in a higher yearly cost than colonoscopy or mt-sDNA.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a prominent healthcare concern the United States, which accounted for 149,500 new cases and 52,980 deaths in 2021. Screening is effective for diagnosing the condition at earlier more treatable stages, and reducing deaths. However, screening is largely underutilized in part due to perceived cost barriers. This observational study used insurance claims data to calculate healthcare costs, resource use, and lost productivity for CRC screening in an average-risk population aged 50­75 years. A total of 903,831 individuals were identified by test groups: multi-target stool DNA test (mt-sDNA test; 29,614 individuals), fecal immunochemical test (FIT; 254,002 individuals), guaiac-based fecal occult blood test (FOBT; 112,757 individuals) and colonoscopy (507,458 individuals). Adjusted costs for initial screening were $3,029 for colonoscopy, $752 for mt-sDNA, $45 for FIT, and $153 for FOBT. Adjusted colonoscopy-related costs combined across the six months following the initial screening were $146 for the colonoscopy cohort, $329 for mt-sDNA, $306 for FIT, and $412 for FOBT. Colonoscopy had the highest costs for lost productivity. Overall, screening colonoscopy was accompanied by the highest productivity loss and up-front costs, suggesting potential cost benefits for noninvasive screening modalities ­ mt-sDNA, FIT, and FOBT; however, the more frequent screening interval required by FIT and FOBT resulted in a higher estimated average yearly screening cost.

Patient and provider factors associated with colorectal cancer screening among average risk health plan enrollees in the US, 2015-2018.

BACKGROUND: To assess patient and primary care provider (PCP) factors associated with adherence to American Cancer Society (ACS) and United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines for average risk colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. METHODS: Retrospective case-control study of medical and pharmacy claims from the Optum Research Database from 01/01/2014 - 12/31/2018. Enrollee sample was adults aged 50 - 75 years with ≥ 24 months continuous health plan enrollment. Provider sample was PCPs listed on the claims of average-risk patients in the enrollee sample. Enrollee-level screening opportunities were based on their exposure to the healthcare system during the baseline year. Screening adherence, calculated at the PCP level, was the percent of average-risk patients up to date with screening recommendations each year. Logistic regression modelling was used to examine the association between receipt of screening and enrollee and PCP characteristics. An ordinary least squares model was used to determine the association between screening adherence among the PCP's panel of patients and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Among patients with a PCP, adherence to ACS and USPSTF screening guidelines ranged from 69 to 80% depending on PCP specialty and type. The greatest enrollee-level predictors for CRC screening were having a primary/preventive care visit (OR = 4.47, p < 0.001) and a main PCP (OR = 2.69, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Increased access to preventive/primary care visits could improve CRC screening rates; however, interventions not dependent on healthcare system contact, such as home-based screening, may circumvent the dependence on primary care visits to complete CRC screening.

Palbociclib Adherence and Persistence in Patients with Hormone Receptor Positive/Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 Negative (HR+/HER2-) Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Purpose: To assess adherence and persistence with palbociclib therapy in patients with HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer (mBC) in a US real-world setting. Methods: This retrospective study evaluated palbociclib dosing, adherence, and persistence using commercial and Medicare Advantage with Part D claims data from the Optum Research Database. Adult patients with mBC who had continuous enrollment 12 months prior to mBC diagnosis and initiated first-line palbociclib with aromatase inhibitor (AI) or fulvestrant between 02/03/2015 and 12/31/2019 were included. Demographic and clinical characteristics, palbociclib dosing and dose changes, adherence (medication possession ratio [MPR]), and persistence were measured. Adjusted logistic and Cox regression models were used to examine demographic and clinical factors associated with adherence and discontinuation. Results: Patients (n = 1066) with a mean age of 66 years were included; 76.1% received first-line palbociclib+AI and 23.9% palbociclib+fulvestrant. Most patients (85.7%) initiated palbociclib at 125 mg/day. Of the 34.0% of patients with a dose reduction, 82.6% reduced from 125 to 100 mg/day. Overall, 80.0% of patients were adherent (MPR), and 38.3% discontinued palbociclib during a mean (SD) follow-up of 16.0 (11.2) and 17.4 (13.4) months, for palbociclib+fulvestrant and palbociclib+AI, respectively. Annual income below $75,000 was significantly associated with poor adherence. Older age (age 65-74 years (hazard ratio [HR] 1.57, 95% CI, 1.06, 2.33), age ≥75 years (HR 1.61, 95% CI: 1.08, 2.41)) and bone-only metastatic disease (HR 1.37, 95% CI, 1.06, 1.76) were significantly associated with palbociclib discontinuation. Conclusion: In this real-world study, >85% of patients started palbociclib at 125 mg/day and 1 in 3 had dose reductions during the follow-up. Patients were generally adherent and persistent with palbociclib. Older age, bone-only disease, and low-income levels were associated with early discontinuation or non-adherence. Further studies are needed to understand the associations of clinical and economic outcomes with palbociclib adherence and persistence.

Colorectal screening among average risk individuals in the United States, 2015-2018.

Colorectal cancer screening rates are important metrics for public health and quality indicators for health care systems; however, published estimates of colorectal cancer screening rates often include both high-risk and average-risk patients, and the use of different epidemiologic methods makes between-study comparisons tenuous. The objective of this study was to measure the proportion of average-risk American adults who are up to date with colorectal cancer screening guidelines and examine the impact of evaluation methods on screening rate estimates. This repeated cross-sectional study used administrative claims to identify individuals aged 50-75 years between 2015 and 2018 with ≥ 1-year of continuous health plan enrollment. Sensitivity analyses to replicate prior studies in the literature included: 1) retrospective cohort study requiring ≥ 10 years of continuous enrollment to identify the most current screening rates (2018), and 2) inclusion of individuals with higher colorectal cancer risk. A total of 2,579,898; 2,948,064; 3,312,882; and 2,752,864 individuals were included in the 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018 populations, respectively. In the cross-sectional sample, the proportion of individuals with up-to-date colorectal cancer screening was 51.8%, 51.3%, 51.0%, and 51.1% in 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018, respectively. The inclusion of high-risk individuals increased estimates approximately 37%. Using a retrospective cohort design, 67.5% of average-risk individuals were up to date in 2018. This study demonstrated the impact of methodological differences on rate estimates. Efforts to track screening rates require transparency in measurement methods to accurately evaluate progress in improving rates.

Gaps in hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance in a United States cohort of insured patients with cirrhosis.

OBJECTIVE: Surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is known to be underutilized; however, neither the variation of surveillance adherence by cirrhosis etiology nor the patient-side economic burden of surveillance are well understood. To identify potential barriers to HCC surveillance, we assessed utilization patterns and costs among US patients with cirrhosis monitored in routine clinical practice. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of insured adult patients with cirrhosis using national administrative claims data from January 2013 through June 2019. Time up-to-date with recommended surveillance, correlates of surveillance receipt, and surveillance-associated costs were assessed during a ≥ 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Among 15,543 patients with cirrhosis (mean [SD] age 64.0 [11.1] years, 50.7% male), 45.8% and 58.7% had received any abdominal imaging at 6 and 12 months, respectively. Patients were up-to-date with recommended surveillance for only 31% of a median 1.3-year follow-up. Those with viral hepatitis were more likely to receive surveillance than those with other etiologies (hazard ratio [HR] 1.55, 95% CI 1.11-2.17, p = .010 for patients without a baseline gastroenterologist [GI] visit and 2.69, 95% CI 1.77-4.09, p < .001 for patients with a GI visit, relative to those with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and no GI visit). For all etiologies except NAFLD, the HR (95% CI) for surveillance receipt was higher among patients with vs without a baseline GI visit (alcohol-related, 1.164 [1.002-1.351] vs 0.880 [0.796-0.972]; viral hepatitis, 2.688 [1.765-4.093] vs 1.553 [1.111-2.171]; Other, 0.612 [0.519-0.722] vs 0.549 [0.470-0.641]). Mean total and patient-paid daily surveillance-related costs ranged from $540 and $113, respectively (ultrasound) to $1580 and $300, respectively (magnetic resonance imaging), and mean estimated patient productivity costs were $730-$2514 annually. CONCLUSION: HCC surveillance was underutilized and was lowest among patients with nonviral etiologies and those who had not seen a gastroenterologist. Surveillance-related out-of-pocket expenses and lost productivity were substantial. The development of surveillance strategies that reduce patient burden, such as those using blood-based biomarkers, may help improve surveillance adherence and effectiveness.

Gaps in hepatocellular carcinoma surveillance among insured patients with hepatitis B infection without cirrhosis in the United States.

Suboptimal adherence to guidelines for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance among high-risk patients is a persistent problem with substantial detriment to patient outcomes. While patients cite cost as a barrier to surveillance receipt, the financial burden they experience due to surveillance has not been examined. We conducted a retrospective administrative claims study to assess HCC surveillance use and associated costs in a US cohort of insured patients without cirrhosis but with hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, monitored in routine clinical practice. Of 6831 patients (1122 on antiviral treatment, 5709 untreated), only 39.3% and 51.3% had received any abdominal imaging after 6 and 12 months, respectively, and patients were up to date with HCC surveillance guidelines for only 28% of the follow-up time. Completion of surveillance was substantially higher at 6 and 12 months among treated patients (51.7% and 69.6%, respectively) compared with untreated patients (36.9% and 47.6%, respectively) (p < 0.001). In adjusted models, treated patients were more likely than untreated patients to receive surveillance (hazard ratio [HR] 1.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.53-2.01, p < 0.001), and the proportion of those up to date with surveillance was 9.7% higher (95% CI 6.26-13.07, p < 0.001). Mean total and patient-paid daily surveillance-related costs ranged from $99 (ultrasound) to $334 (magnetic resonance imaging), and mean annual patient costs due to lost productivity for surveillance-related outpatient visits ranged from $93 (using the federal minimum wage) to $321 (using the Bureau of Labor Statistics wage). Conclusion: Use of current HCC surveillance strategies was low across patients with HBV infection, and surveillance was associated with substantial patient financial burden. These data highlight an urgent need for accessible and easy-to-implement surveillance strategies with sufficient sensitivity and specificity for early HCC detection.

Increasing prevalence of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in a managed care population in the United States.

PURPOSE: Numerous treatment breakthroughs for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have been demonstrated in clinical trials in the past 15 years. However, real-world evidence on the changing epidemiology and longevity of this population has not been demonstrated. This study assessed prevalence trends for mCRPC over eight years in a large managed care population. METHODS: In a claims database, adult male patients were included with ≥ 1 claim for prostate cancer, pharmacologic/surgical castration, and metastatic disease during the identification period. The index mCRPC date was the first metastatic claim; six months of continuous enrollment before and after was required. Patients with metastatic disease at baseline were excluded. Patients were followed until death, end of study, or disenrollment, whichever was earliest. Total, mCRPC per-prostate cancer, and age-specific prevalence rates were calculated cross-sectionally for each year under study (2010-2017). RESULTS: Of 343,089 patients identified with a claim for prostate cancer, 3690 mCRPC cases (1.1%) were identified. Incidence (new cases per year) remained relatively constant over the study period while prevalence of mCRPC (total cases per year) increased. mCRPC prevalence increased with increasing age. Total and mCRPC per-prostate cancer prevalence rates increased in monotonic, year-over-year trends from 2010 to 2017, while incidence (new cases per year) of mCRPC remained relatively stable. CONCLUSION: This study found increasing prevalence of mCRPC in an insured patient population during the 8-year period, coupled with stable incidence, validating that patients with the disease are living longer. With the addition of androgen receptor-directed therapies and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors in recent years, this trend will likely continue.

The Impact of Adverse Events on Health Care Resource Utilization, Costs, and Mortality Among Patients Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the association between adverse events (AEs) suspected to be immune-related and health care resource utilization, costs, and mortality among patients receiving programmed cell death 1/programmed cell death ligand 1 immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) monotherapy for urothelial carcinoma, renal cell carcinoma, non-small cell lung cancer, or Merkel cell carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using medical and pharmacy claims and enrollment information from U.S. commercial and Medicare Advantage with Part D enrollees in the Optum Research Database from March 1, 2014, through April 30, 2019. Claims were linked with mortality data from the Social Security Death Index and the National Death Index. Eligible patients had at least one ICI claim between September 1, 2014, and April 30, 2019. RESULTS: After adjusting for potential confounding variables, we found patients with AEs had more than double the risk of an inpatient stay (hazard ratio [HR], 2.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9-2.5) and an 80% higher risk of an emergency visit (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.6-2.1) than patients without AEs. Adjusted 6-month total costs were $24,301 higher among patients with an AE versus those without ($99,037 vs. $74,736; 95% CI, $18,828-29,774; p < .001). Mean ± SD AE-related medical costs averaged $2,359 ± $7,496 per patient per month, driven by inpatient visits, which accounted for 89.9% of AE-related costs. Adjusted risk of mortality was similar in patients with and without AEs. CONCLUSION: Patients with AEs had higher risks of hospitalizations, emergency room visits, and higher health care costs, driven by inpatient stays, than patients without AEs. The adjusted risk of mortality was similar between the two cohorts. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Patients taking immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) who had adverse events (AEs) had significantly higher health care costs and utilization, driven by inpatient stays, compared with patients who did not. Given this high cost associated with AEs and the differences in the side effect profile of ICIs versus traditional chemotherapy, it is important for physicians to be cognizant of these differences when treating patients with ICIs. Ongoing evaluation, earlier recognition, and more effective, multidisciplinary management of AEs may improve patient outcomes and reduce the need for costly inpatient stays.

Opioid Use Associated With Higher Costs Among Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Background: Opioid use by patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has been associated with poorer health outcomes. This study describes socioeconomic characteristics; health utilization trends; and costs of patients with IBD and either no opioid prescriptions, or in 1 of 3 opioid duration categories based on Center for Disease Control guidelines: acute (0-30 days), moderate (31-90 days), or chronic (>90 days). We utilized the Cost of IBD Care Optum research database results for this study. Methods: The Optum Research Database from years 2007 to 2016 including IBD patients with commercial or Medicare Advantage insurance in the United States was used. Additional inclusion criteria included continuous enrollment with medical and pharmacy benefit coverage for at least 24 months (12 months before and 12 months after the index date of IBD diagnosis). The association between costs and patient characteristics were assessed across a no opioid use group during this period and the 3 opioid duration groups. Results: Among 51,178 IBD patients, 33,229 (64.93%) were part of the no opioid use group, while 13,635 (26.64%) were in acute, 1698 (3.32%) were in moderate, and 2616 (5.11%) were in chronic use groups, as determined by pharmacy claims data. Patients in the chronic group were more likely to be white (75.38%) compared to all the other groups (no opioid use, acute, and moderate), have attained less education (only high school diploma), have had lower incomes, and have had Medicare instead of commercial insurance. Patients across all opioid prescription groups were more likely to have had diagnoses associated with pain in the prior year, with rates increasing by the length of opioid prescription (63.68%, 80.17%, and 86.11% for acute, moderate, and chronic groups). Compared to the no-use group, the acute group had more ambulatory (outpatient) visits, while the chronic group had fewer. Emergency department visits and inpatient hospitalizations were higher in all 3 opioid groups compared to the no opioid use group. Ambulatory, emergency department, inpatient, and total (medical + pharmacy) costs were higher in all 3 opioid groups, compared to the no opioid use group, even after adjusting for demographic and clinical patient characteristics. Conclusions: Among patients with IBD, increasing opioid use was associated with higher healthcare resource utilization and, concomitantly, higher healthcare costs during this period.

Mental Health Costs of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases.

BACKGROUND: Mental health diagnoses (MHDs) were identified as significant drivers of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)-related costs in an analysis titled "Cost of Care Initiative" supported by the Crohn's & Colitis Foundation. In this subanalysis, we sought to characterize and compare IBD patients with and without MHDs based on insurance claims data in terms of demographic traits, medical utilization, and annualized costs of care. METHODS: We analyzed the Optum Research Database of administrative claims from years 2007 to 2016 representing commercially insured and Medicare Advantage insured IBD patients in the United States. Inflammatory bowel disease patients with and without an MHD were compared in terms of demographics (age, gender, race), insurance type, IBD-related medical utilization (ambulatory visits, emergency department [ED] visits, and inpatient hospitalizations), and total IBD-related costs. Only patients with costs >$0 in each of the utilization categories were included in the cost estimates. RESULTS: Of the total IBD study cohort of 52,782 patients representing 179,314 person-years of data, 22,483 (42.6%) patients had at least 1 MHD coded in their claims data with a total of 46,510 person-years in which a patient had a coded MHD. The most commonly coded diagnostic categories were depressive disorders, anxiety disorders, adjustment disorders, substance use disorders, and bipolar and related disorders. Compared with patients without an MHD, a significantly greater percentage of IBD patients with MHDs were female (61.59% vs 48.63%), older than 75 years of age (9.59% vs 6.32%), white (73.80% vs 70.17%), and significantly less likely to be younger than 25 years of age (9.18% vs 11.39%) compared with those without mental illness (P < 0.001). Patients with MHDs had significantly more ED visits (14.34% vs 7.62%, P < 0.001) and inpatient stays (19.65% vs 8.63%, P < 0.001) compared with those without an MHD. Concomitantly, patients with MHDs had significantly higher ED costs ($970 vs $754, P < 0.001) and inpatient costs ($39,205 vs $29,550, P < 0.001) compared with IBD patients without MHDs. Patients with MHDs also had significantly higher total annual IBD-related surgical costs ($55,693 vs $40,486, P < 0.001) and nonsurgical costs (medical and pharmacy) ($17,220 vs $11,073, P < 0.001), and paid a larger portion of the total out-of-pocket cost for IBD services ($1017 vs $905, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients whose claims data contained both IBD-related and MHD-related diagnoses generated significantly higher costs compared with IBD patients without an MHD diagnosis. Based on these data, we speculate that health care costs might be reduced and the course of patients IBD might be improved if the IBD-treating provider recognized this link and implemented effective behavioral health screening and intervention as soon as an MHD was suspected during management of IBD patients. Studies investigating best screening and intervention strategies for MHDs are needed.

The Identification and Cost of Acute Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Exacerbations in a United States Population Healthcare Claims Database.

Almost half of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations are estimated to be inaccurately reported by patients, inconsistently recorded in medical records, or not measured due to coding errors inherent to administrative claims. This retrospective observational study aimed to develop an algorithm capable of detecting acute COPD exacerbations (AECOPD) in healthcare claims and estimate costs associated with AECOPD over a 12-month period. Commercial and Medicare Advantage healthcare plan members (≥40 years old) with evidence of COPD were identified from US healthcare-claims database. To refine the algorithm detecting AECOPD in claims data, sensitivity and positive-predictive value calculations were performed to compare AECOPD identification in healthcare claims versus medical charts. Analyses were also performed to examine total exacerbation-related costs for events identified with the new claims algorithm plus events missed. The final algorithm had a sensitivity of 84.9%, with a positive-predictive value of 67.5%. Medical records were abstracted for 402 patients. In the overall sample of healthcare claims (n = 243,998), the algorithm detected ≥1 AECOPD event in 61.3% of patients. The mean cost per patient during an AECOPD episode, identified by the final algorithm, was USD 6,760 (n = 301), with an incremental average cost of USD 607 (n = 122) to 'unobserved' episodes (not reported in claims data) among the chart sample. After multivariate modeling, predicted yearly exacerbation costs translated to USD 1.12 billion per 100,000 patients (USD 12,000 per patient), with 35.76 million associated with unobserved exacerbations. While the final algorithm warrants further validation and study, these findings highlight unobserved AECOPD and their economic burden.

Real-World Costs of Adverse Events in First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the most common form of lung cancer in the United States. Immunotherapies and cytotoxic chemotherapies used to treat advanced NSCLC carry a substantial risk of adverse events (AEs), but real-world data on the incidence and costs associated with the unique AE profiles of these treatments are sparse. OBJECTIVE: To examine the AE incidence and costs among patients initiating non-driver mutation-targeted first-line therapy for metastatic NSCLC (mNSCLC) in clinical practice. METHODS: This was a retrospective administrative claims study conducted among commercial and Medicare Advantage health plan members who initiated first-line, nontargeted systemic anti-NSCLC therapy between January 1, 2008, and February 28, 2018. Patients were assigned to mutually exclusive treatment cohorts (cytotoxic chemotherapy [CHEM], immuno-oncology agents [IO], or immuno-oncology + cytotoxic chemotherapy [IO-CHEM]) and were observed from the index date (start of first-line therapy) through the earliest of health plan disenrollment, death, or March 31, 2018. AE incidence rates and associated health care costs were measured from the index date through the earliest of the start of a new therapy, 180 days after the end of first-line therapy, or the end of the study period. The factors influencing whether patients incurred high AE-related health care costs were assessed using multivariable models adjusted for patient demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: The final study population (mean [SD] age 68.6 [9.5] years, 53.9% male) included 8,818 in the CHEM cohort, 482 in the IO cohort, and 412 in the IO-CHEM cohort. Overall, 74.4% had at least 1 AE during follow-up. The AE incidence rate was lowest for the IO cohort, with incidence rate ratios (95% CI) of 1.4 (1.3-1.6) for the CHEM cohort and 1.4 (1.2-1.6) for the IO-CHEM cohort. Mean AE-related costs were lowest for the IO cohort ($16,319) and highest for the CHEM cohort ($23,009; P < 0.001). In the multivariable analysis, the odds of incurring any AE costs were similar for the IO and IO-CHEM cohorts compared with the CHEM cohort (OR = 0.82; P = 0.135 and OR = 0.98; P = 0.888, respectively). Among patients who incurred AE costs, those in the IO cohort were less likely than those in the CHEM cohort to have high costs (OR = 0.60; P = 0.030); the difference between the IO-CHEM and CHEM cohorts was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Among real-world patients initiating nontargeted first-line therapy for mNSCLC, those receiving immunotherapy experienced fewer AEs and had lower total AE-related costs than those treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy. Immunotherapy-treated patients were no more likely than chemotherapy-treated patients to incur AE-related costs and were less likely to have high AE costs if they incurred any at all. These findings indicate that immunotherapy-related AEs are not a differentiating factor in cost of care for this patient population in clinical practice. DISCLOSURES: This study was sponsored by AstraZeneca. Ryan is an employee of AstraZeneca. Engel-Nitz, Johnson, and Bunner are employees of Optum, which was contracted by AstraZeneca to conduct this study, and shareholders in UnitedHealth Group. Engel-Nitz has also worked on cancer-related studies for which Optum received funding from Bayer AG, Clovis Oncology, Eli Lilly, EMD Serono, Exact Sciences, Janssen, and Novartis. Johnson worked on cancer-related studies for which Optum received funding from Eli Lilly, Medtronic, Sanofi, and UnitedHealthcare. Bunner has worked on cancer-related studies for which Optum received funding from Celgene and Incyte.

The Cost of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: An Initiative From the Crohn's & Colitis Foundation.

BACKGROUND: The Crohn's & Colitis Foundation's Cost of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) Care Initiative seeks to quantify the wide-ranging health care costs affecting patients living with IBD. We aimed to (1) describe the annualized direct and indirect costs of care for patients with Crohn's disease (CD) or ulcerative colitis (UC), (2) determine the longitudinal drivers of these costs, and (3) characterize the cost of care for newly diagnosed patients. METHODS: We analyzed the Optum Research Database from the years 2007 to 2016, representing commercially insured and Medicare Advantage-insured patients in the United States. Inclusion for the study was limited to those who had continuous enrollment with medical and pharmacy benefit coverage for at least 24 months (12 months before through 12 months after the index date of diagnosis). The value of patient time spent on health care was calculated as number of workplace hours lost due to health care encounters multiplied by the patients' estimated average wage derived from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Comparisons between IBD patients and non-IBD patients were analyzed based on demographics, health plan type, and length of follow-up. We used generalized linear models to estimate the association between total annual costs and various patient variables. RESULTS: There were 52,782 IBD patients (29,062 UC; 23,720 CD) included in the analysis (54.1% females). On a per-annual basis, patients with IBD incurred a greater than 3-fold higher direct cost of care compared with non-IBD controls ($22,987 vs $6956 per-member per-year paid claims) and more than twice the out-of-pocket costs ($2213 vs $979 per-year reported costs), with all-cause IBD costs rising after 2013. Patients with IBD also experienced significantly higher costs associated with time spent on health care as compared with controls. The burden of costs was most notable in the first year after initial IBD diagnosis (mean = $26,555). The study identified several key drivers of cost for IBD patients: treatment with specific therapeutics (biologics, opioids, or steroids); ED use; and health care services associated with relapsing disease, anemia, or mental health comorbidity. CONCLUSION: The costs of care for IBD have increased in the last 5 years and are driven by specific therapeutics and disease features. In addition, compared with non-IBD controls, IBD patients are increasingly incurring higher costs associated with health care utilization, out-of-pocket expenditures, and workplace productivity losses. There is a pressing need for cost-effective strategies to address these burdens on patients and families affected by IBD.

Cost of Disease Progression in Patients with Metastatic Breast, Lung, and Colorectal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: To reduce health care costs and improve care, payers and physician groups are piloting value-based and episodic or bundled-care payment models in oncology. Disease progression and associated costs may affect these models, particularly if such programs do not account for disease severity and progression risk across patient populations. This study estimated the incremental cost of disease progression in patients diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer (mBC), colorectal cancer (mCRC) and lung cancer (mLC) and compared costs among patients with and without progression. METHODS: This was a retrospective study using U.S. administrative claims data from commercial and Medicare Advantage health care enrollees with evidence of mBC, mCRC, and mLC and systemic antineoplastic agent use from July 1, 2006, to August 31, 2014. Outcome measures included disease progression, 12-month health care costs, and 3-year cumulative predictive health care costs. RESULTS: Of 5,709 patients with mBC, 3,707 patients with mCRC, and 5,201 patients with mLC, 56.8% of patients with mBC, 58.1% of those with mCRC, and 80.3% of those with mLC patients had evidence of disease progression over 12 months. Among patients with mBC and mCRC, adjusted and unadjusted health care costs were significantly higher among progressors versus nonprogressors. Per-patient-per-month costs, which accounted for variable follow-up time, were almost twice as high among progressors versus nonprogressors in patients with mBC, mCRC, and mLC. In each of the three cancer types, delays in progression were associated with lower health care costs. CONCLUSION: Progression of mLC, mBC, and mCRC was associated with higher health care costs over a 12-month period. Delayed cancer progression was associated with substantial cost reductions in patients with each of the three cancer types. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Data on the rates and incremental health care costs of disease progression in patients with solid tumor cancers are lacking. This study estimated the incremental costs of disease progression in patients diagnosed with lung cancer, breast cancer, and colorectal cancer and compared health care costs in patients with and without evidence of disease progression in a real-world population. The data obtained in our study quantify the economic value of delaying or preventing disease progression and may inform payers and physician groups about value-based payment programs.

Cost of Disease Progression in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia, Acute Myeloid Leukemia, and Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma.

INTRODUCTION: To reduce health care costs and improve care, payers and physician groups are switching to quality-based and episodic or bundled-care models. Disease progression and associated costs may affect these models, particularly if such programs do not account for differences in disease severity and progression risk within the cohort. This study estimated the incremental cost of disease progression in patients diagnosed with chronic lymphoid leukemia (CLL), acute myeloid leukemia (AML), and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) and compared costs among patients with and without progression. METHODS: This was a retrospective study using U.S. administrative claims data from commercial and Medicare Advantage health care enrollees with evidence of CLL, AML, and NHL and systemic antineoplastic agent use from July 1, 2006 to August 31, 2014. Outcome measures included disease progression, 12-month health care costs, and 3-year cumulative predictive health care costs. RESULTS: Of 1,056 patients with CLL, 514 patients with AML, and 7,601 patients with NHL, 31.1% of patients with CLL, 63.8% of those with AML, and 36.9% of those with NHL had evidence of disease progression. Among patients with CLL and NHL, adjusted and unadjusted health care costs were significantly higher among progressors versus nonprogressors. Per-patient-per-month costs, accounting for variable follow-up time, were almost twice as high among progressors versus nonprogressors in patients with CLL, AML, and NHL. In each of the three cancer types, the longer disease progression was delayed, the lower the health care costs. CONCLUSION: Progression of CLL, AML, and NHL was associated with higher health care costs over a 12-month period. Delaying cancer progression resulted in a substantial cost reduction in patients with all three cancer types. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Data on the rates and incremental health care costs of disease progression in patients with hematologic malignancies are lacking. This study estimated the incremental costs of disease progression in patients diagnosed with chronic lymphocytic leukemia, acute myeloid leukemia, and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and compared health care costs in patients with and without evidence of disease progression in a real-world population. The data obtained in this study will assist future studies in quantifying the cost impact of decreased progression rates and will inform payers and physician groups about setting rates for episode and bundled payment programs.

Burden of illness in patients with treatment refractory myasthenia gravis.

INTRODUCTION: This study assessed the clinical burden of refractory myasthenia gravis (MG), relative to nonrefractory MG. METHODS: Rates of myasthenic crises, exacerbations, inpatient hospitalizations, and emergency room (ER) visits over a 1-year period were measured for 403 refractory, 3,811 nonrefractory, and 403 non-MG control patients from two administrative health plan databases. RESULTS: Compared with nonrefractory patients, a significantly greater percentage of refractory patients had at least one myasthenic crisis (21.3% vs. 6.1%; P < 0.001) and at least one exacerbation (71.2% vs. 32.4%; P < 0.001) over a 1-year period. Refractory patients were also significantly more likely to be hospitalized and/or have an ER visit than nonrefractory patients and non-MG controls (P < 0.001 for all). DISCUSSION: Refractory MG patients have significantly greater clinical burden and are more likely to utilize intensive healthcare resources than nonrefractory patients. Furthermore, refractory patients may be at greater risk of crises throughout the disease course than previous studies have suggested. Muscle Nerve, 2018.

Management of a Rare Disease Population: A Model for Identifying a Patient Population With Tuberous Sclerosis Complex.

Tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) is a rare genetic disorder affecting the brain and other vital organs with varying symptoms and severity among patients. This study developed and validated a risk model to identify patients with TSC using large databases of medical and pharmacy claims.

Costs and mortality of recurrent versus de novo hormone receptor-positive/HER2(-) metastatic breast cancer.

AIM: To examine cost and mortality differences in postmenopausal women with HR(+)/HER2(-) advanced breast cancer. METHODS: Using claims data (2007-2013), women with newly diagnosed (de novo) stage IV, or early- or late-recurring metastatic breast cancer were identified. RESULTS: Compared with de novo (n = 121) and late-recurrent (n = 106), early-recurrent (n = 172) patients had significantly higher costs in total and for anticancer systemic agents. Adjusted per patient per month costs for early-recurrent patients were US$13,404, versus US$9955 (de novo) and US$9721 (late-recurrent; p = 0.02). Early-recurrent patients' risk of death was twice that of de novo patients (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Compared with new diagnosis or late recurrence, early recurrence of HR+/HER2- metastatic breast cancer was associated with higher mortality and healthcare costs.

An Evaluation of Algorithms for Identifying Metastatic Breast, Lung, or Colorectal Cancer in Administrative Claims Data.

BACKGROUND: Administrative health care claims data are used for epidemiologic, health services, and outcomes cancer research and thus play a significant role in policy. Cancer stage, which is often a major driver of cost and clinical outcomes, is not typically included in claims data. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate algorithms used in a dataset of cancer patients to identify patients with metastatic breast (BC), lung (LC), or colorectal (CRC) cancer using claims data. METHODS: Clinical data on BC, LC, or CRC patients (between January 1, 2007 and March 31, 2010) were linked to a health care claims database. Inclusion required health plan enrollment ≥3 months before initial cancer diagnosis date. Algorithms were used in the claims database to identify patients' disease status, which was compared with physician-reported metastases. Generic and tumor-specific algorithms were evaluated using ICD-9 codes, varying diagnosis time frames, and including/excluding other tumors. Positive and negative predictive values, sensitivity, and specificity were assessed. RESULTS: The linked databases included 14,480 patients; of whom, 32%, 17%, and 14.2% had metastatic BC, LC, and CRC, respectively, at diagnosis and met inclusion criteria. Nontumor-specific algorithms had lower specificity than tumor-specific algorithms. Tumor-specific algorithms' sensitivity and specificity were 53% and 99% for BC, 55% and 85% for LC, and 59% and 98% for CRC, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Algorithms to distinguish metastatic BC, LC, and CRC from locally advanced disease should use tumor-specific primary cancer codes with 2 claims for the specific primary cancer >30-42 days apart to reduce misclassification. These performed best overall in specificity, positive predictive values, and overall accuracy to identify metastatic cancer in a health care claims database.