Corticosteroid Use and Adherence in Patients Treated with Acthar Gel for Advanced Sarcoidosis.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term corticosteroid use in immune-mediated diseases is associated with increased risk of adverse events (AEs) and worsened health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Previous studies report chronic high-dose corticosteroid therapy results in higher rates of healthcare resource use and AE-related medical costs. Recent studies suggest Acthar® Gel (repository corticotropin injection) is an effective steroid-sparing therapy for sarcoidosis. This study compares the corticosteroid-sparing effect between Acthar Gel and comparators and evaluates the impact of Acthar Gel adherence on reduction of corticosteroid burden. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of a large administrative pharmacy and medical claims database (Symphony Health Solutions) was conducted. Patients were included with confirmed ICD-9/10 diagnosis for sarcoidosis in the study period (2014-2020), followed by ≥ 2 Acthar Gel claims or comparators (janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi)/rituximab), ≥ 18 years old, with 12 months coverage pre/post index. Outcomes were compared as change from baseline. Acthar Gel adherence was determined by proportion of days covered in the follow-up period. RESULTS: The Acthar Gel (n = 735) and comparator (n = 626) cohorts were mostly female (68-72%) between 55 and 58 years old. Compared to the comparator cohort at baseline, Acthar Gel patients had greater any corticosteroid use (80% vs. 56%, p < 0.001), extended use (61% vs. 32%, p < 0.001), and mean average daily dose (6.72 vs. 3.03, p < 0.001). After treatment, Acthar Gel patients had greater reduction from baseline in any corticosteroid use (- 9.0% vs. - 3.2%) and extended use (- 10.0% vs. - 3.0%). In the Acthar Gel adherence cohorts, patients with above average adherence had greater reduction in both measures (- 11.2% vs. - 6.1%; - 11.6% vs. - 7.6%, respectively) than patients with below average adherence. Acthar Gel patients had greater reduction of extended use at all dose levels. CONCLUSION: Acthar Gel is associated with reductions in corticosteroid use compared to alternatives. Better adherence is associated with greater reduction in corticosteroid exposure. Key Summary Points.

Patients who use corticosteroids long term for advanced sarcoidosis often suffer from negative health effects. This project aimed to evaluate whether Acthar^® Gel (repository corticotropin injection) use led to reduced corticosteroid use and whether higher adherence to Acthar Gel led to further reduction in corticosteroid use. Pharmacy and medical claims data were used to identify patients who fit certain criteria: the Acthar Gel cohort included patients with sarcoidosis who used Acthar Gel and the comparator cohort included patients with sarcoidosis who used janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors or rituximab. The Acthar Gel cohort was split into high adherence and low adherence. The Acthar Gel cohort was found to have higher corticosteroid use than the comparator group in the baseline period before initiating Acthar Gel or a comparator therapy. After initiating treatment, Acthar Gel patients had a larger reduction in corticosteroid use according to a variety of metrics including number of corticosteroid fills and extended use fills. Furthermore, when comparing those with high Acthar Gel adherence and those with low Acthar Gel adherence, the patients with above average adherence had a larger reduction in the number of corticosteroid fills and extended use fills than patients with below average adherence to Acthar Gel. Patients who use Acthar Gel and more regularly tended to use corticosteroids less, which may allow them to avoid the negative health effects from long-term, high-dosage corticosteroid use. This finding may help providers and health plans evaluate situations in which Acthar Gel treatment may be beneficial to improve patient outcomes.

Prescription opioid utilization patterns, and associated outcomes, among privately insured patients prescribed opioids to manage pain associated with osteoarthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To describe utilization patterns, negative clinical outcomes and economic burden of patients diagnosed with osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip and/or knee who received a prescription for tramadol or non-tramadol opioids vs. non-opioid drugs. METHODS: Optum Healthcare Solutions, Inc. commercial claims data were used (1/2012--3/2017). Adults with ≥2 diagnoses of OA of the hip and/or knee, and ≥30 days supply of pain medications were identified during the three-year period from the date of first prescription (index date) after the first OA diagnosis. Drug utilization statistics in the follow-up period were summarized by initial treatment (i.e. tramadol, non-tramadol opioids, non-opioid drugs). Opioid initiators were matched to those initiated on non-opioid treatments using a propensity score model accounting for baseline characteristics. Matched pairs analysis compared outcomes for these cohorts. RESULTS: Of 62,715 total patients, 15,270 (24.3%) initiated treatment with opioids, including 3,513 (5.6%) on tramadol and 11,757 (18.7%) on non-tramadol opioids. Opioid initiators had more comorbidities, higher baseline healthcare costs, and were more likely to have OA of the hip. Among non-opioid initiators, 27.5% switched to tramadol and 63% switched to non-tramadol opioids. Among tramadol initiators, 71% switched to non-tramadol opioids. Patients initiated on opioids had 20.4% (p < .01) higher all-cause healthcare costs and higher percentages experiencing multiple negative clinical outcomes (all p < .01) compared to matched controls. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with OA of the hip and/or knee either initiate on or switch to opioids for long-term management of OA-related pain despite known risks. This highlights the need for new treatments that delay or prevent use of opioids.

Risk Factors Associated with Falls and Fractures Following Prescription of Opioids Among Privately Insured Patients with Osteoarthritis.

Background: While prior research has shown that patients with osteoarthritis (OA) who are prescribed opioids have higher rates of falls and fractures following drug initiation, there is a limited body of work establishing a comprehensive model of factors that influence the risk of falls or fractures among these patients. Objective: Opioids are associated with negative clinical outcomes, including increased risk of falls and fractures. This study assessed the frequency, treatment characteristics, and risk factors associated with falls or fractures among patients with OA taking opioids. Methods: Optum Healthcare Solutions, Inc data (January 2012-March 2017) were used to identify patients over 18 with at least 2 diagnoses of hip and/or knee OA, and at least 90 days' supply of opioids. Patients with cancer were excluded. Falls or fractures outcomes were assessed in the 36-month follow-up period after the date of the first opioid prescription after first OA diagnosis. Demographic, treatment, and clinical characteristics associated with falls or fractures were assessed using logistic regression. Results: Of 16 663 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 3886 (23%) had at least 1 fall or fracture during follow-up. Of these 3886 patients, 1349 (35%) had at least 1 fall with an average of 3 fall claims, and 3299 (85%) patients had at least 1 fracture with an average of 8 claims during follow-up. Spine (15.8%) and hip (12.5%) fractures were most common. Median time to fall or fracture was 18.6 and 13.9 months, respectively. Significant (P<.05) risk factors associated with at least 1 fall or fracture during the follow-up period included alcohol use (odds ratio [OR], 3.41), history of falling (OR, 2.19), non-tramadol opioid use (OR, 1.31), age (OR, 1.03), benzodiazepine use (OR, 1.21), and at least 1 osteoporosis diagnosis (OR, 2.06). Discussion: This study is among only a few that clearly identifies the substantial impact and frequency of falls and fractures associated with prescribing non-tramadol opioids to patients with OA. Findings suggest that fall or fracture risks need to be considered when managing OA pain with opioids. Conclusion: Falls and fractures impose a major clinical burden on patients prescribed opioids for OA-related pain management. Falls or fracture risks should be an important consideration in the ongoing treatment of patients with OA.

Drug utilization, clinical and economic outcomes of patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and/or knee treated with long-term use of traditional NSAIDs, topical NSAIDs, and COX-2 inhibitors.

OBJECTIVES: To describe and compare baseline characteristics, healthcare and drug utilization, and negative clinical outcomes of commercially-insured patients diagnosed with OA of the hip and/or knee who initiated treatment on traditional oral NSAIDs (tNSAIDs), topical NSAIDs, or cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors (COX-2s). METHODS: A commercial claims database (1/2012-3/2017) was used to identify patients ≥18 years old, with ≥2 diagnoses of hip and/or knee OA, and ≥90 days supply of NSAIDs. Patients were assigned to cohorts based on the type of NSAID initially prescribed and observed in the 6 months before (baseline) and 36 months after (follow-up) the date of their first NSAID prescription after the first OA diagnosis. Analyses estimated baseline demographic and clinical characteristics and follow-up period drug utilization. Logistic regressions assessed the risk of gastrointestinal (GI) and acute renal failure (ARF) events. RESULTS: tNSAIDs were the most frequently prescribed treatment. During the follow-up period, less than 15% of patients prescribed tNSAIDs switched to either COX-2s or topical NSAIDs and 37% of patients prescribed a COX-2 and 56% of patients prescribed a topical NSAID switched to tNSAIDs. GI and ARF events during the follow-up period ranged from 7.3-8.1% and 8.0-11.0%, respectively, across cohorts. The tNSAIDs and COX-2s cohorts had increased risk of both types of events relative to patients prescribed topical NSAIDs, controlling for other characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Analyses characterize the long-term real-world utilization of NSAIDs and associated outcomes for patients with OA of the hip and/or knee. Study results highlight the likelihood of switching and the risk of negative clinical outcomes associated with long-term use.

Clinical and economic burden of prescribing tramadol and other opioids for patients with osteoarthritis in a commercially insured population in the United States.

ABSTRACT: In 2019, the American College of Rheumatology conditionally recommended tramadol and conditionally recommended against nontramadol opioids for patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis. Although tramadol is known to be less prone to opioid use disorders, little is known about the differing magnitude of negative clinical outcomes, health care resource utilization, and costs of tramadol relative to nontramadol opioids. Administrative claims records for commercially insured patients with osteoarthritis who were prescribed opioids were used to compare clinical and cost outcomes during a 3-year follow-up period by conducting a pre-post analysis and a matched case-cohort analysis. Data for 14,491 patients were analyzed: 4048 (28%) were initiated on tramadol, and 10,443 (72%) were initiated on nontramadol opioids. After matching, 4048 patients per cohort were analyzed. In each empirical analysis, tramadol patients did develop opioid use disorders; however, opioid use disorder rates were 3.5-fold higher in the nontramadol cohort (1.2% vs 4.2%). In addition, rates of other opioid-related clinical outcomes (falls, fractures, nausea, fatigue, and constipation) were also directionally lower among the tramadol cohort, although quantitatively similar (<5% difference) to the nontramadol cohort. Finally, in both analyses, the nontramadol cohort incurred higher levels of inpatient and emergency department visits and all-cause costs during the 3-year follow-up period. However, tramadol patients incur a higher incremental change (+$24,013) in costs relative to their pretreatment baseline compared with nontramadol (+$18,191). These real-world findings demonstrated lower risks with tramadol relative to other opioids, albeit risks and increased health care costs were present with tramadol, highlighting the need for further strategies to improve outcomes.

A harm reduction model to assess the impact of new treatments for pain over standard of care among patients with osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) affects millions of adults in the United States and can result in substantial pain, functional impairment, and significant clinical and economic burden. To manage chronic pain associated with OA, treatment guidelines recommend a variety of pharmacologic treatments, including traditional oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors (COX-2s), and opioids. While these drug treatments can be effective at pain management, they are also associated with significant clinical and economic burden. New treatments for chronic pain among patients with OA of the hip and/or knee have the potential to reduce the occurrence of such negative clinical outcomes, including cardiovascular events, renal events, and opioid use disorder (OUD), thereby reducing health care resource use (HRU) and medical costs. OBJECTIVE: To develop a harm reduction model (HRM) to assess potential reductions of negative clinical outcomes, HRU, and medical costs associated with the use of new treatments in place of oral NSAIDs, tramadol, and non-tramadol opioids among patients with OA of the hip and/or knee in the United States. METHODS: The HRM model integrated findings from the literature and inputs from a variety of sources, along with assumptions regarding potential ability of new treatments to replace existing treatments and market penetration into a unified framework to estimate outcomes and costs. The model outputs included estimated per-patient and population-level reductions in negative clinical outcomes associated with prescribing new treatments in place of oral NSAIDs or opioids along with number needed to treat (NNT) associated with new treatments. The model assumed that new treatments will primarily be used in place of non-tramadol opioids, but more modest adoption in place of oral NSAIDs and tramadol. RESULTS: Among patients with OA of the hip and/or knee who were prescribed oral NSAIDs, tramadol, or non-tramadol opioids for chronic use (≥ 90 days), the HRM estimated total cost savings of $3.8 billion, $5.1 billion, and $29.9 billion, respectively, from prescribing new treatments for OA pain over a 36-month period. The reduced economic burden was driven by significant reductions in the incidence of negative clinical outcomes. Estimates of the NNT to avoid a negative clinical event related to NSAID and opioid treatment initiation were low for most outcomes. Estimates of NNT associated with NSAID use ranged from 4 to 17 patients, depending on outcome, and estimates of NNT associated with opioid use was 35 non-tramadol and 134 tramadol patients for OUD and ranged from 6 to 21 patients for the other clinical outcomes, depending on treatment and outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Results from the HRM suggest that prescribing new treatments in place of oral NSAIDs and/or opioids for OA pain results in a potentially substantial reduction in patients experiencing negative clinical outcomes and reductions in all-cause HRU and costs. DISCLOSURES: This study was sponsored by Pfizer and Eli Lilly and Company. Silverman was a paid consultant to Pfizer and Eli Lilly and Company in connection with this study. Beck and Schepman are employees of Pfizer with stock and/or stock options. Robinson is an employee and minor stockholder of Eli Lilly and Company. Rice, White, and Fernan are employees of the Analysis Group, who were paid consultants to Pfizer and Eli Lilly and Company for this study and development of the manuscript.

Consequences of insurance denials among U.S. patients prescribed repository corticotropin injection (Acthar Gel) for nephrotic syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: Repository corticotropin injection (RCI; Acthar Gel) is indicated to induce a diuresis or a remission of proteinuria in nephrotic syndrome (NS) without uremia of the idiopathic type or that due to lupus erythematosus. This study compares patient characteristics and measurable healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) between NS patients who received a prescription for RCI and then were either approved or denied treatment by their insurers. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of adults with NS from January 2015 to December 2018 was conducted using a de-identified open-source claims database. Patients were included in the study if they had ≥1diagnosis associated with NS, were age 18+, and had medical claims activity at some point in the year preceding ("baseline") and year following ("follow up") their first approved or denied RCI prescription. Baseline characteristics were reported with p-values indicating the significance of characteristics between cohorts. To assess outcomes, approved and denied patients were matched (1:1) using propensity-matching to account for underlying differences. RESULTS: Overall, 1,232 patients met inclusion criteria for the study. At baseline, approved patients were older than denied patients (mean age 53.9 vs. 48.4) and had higher rates of comorbidities. A greater proportion of approved patients required inpatient admissions (34.1 vs. 28.0%) and "high" doses of corticosteroids (CS) (26.2 vs. 20.7%) at baseline. Matched outcomes showed directionally more denied patients with inpatient admissions compared to approved (64 vs. 52) and a greater utilization of deep vein thrombosis ultrasound (12.2 vs. 6.6%) and dialysis (10.5 vs. 6.1%). Matched, denied patients had directionally greater CS use during follow-up both in the number of patients receiving CS (104 vs. 95) and the average annualized daily dose (4.1 vs. 3.4 mg). CONCLUSION: Patients denied access to RCI treatment had directionally higher HCRU compared to matched, approved counterparts. Thus, the results of this study may aid providers and payers in evaluating scenarios where RCI may be beneficial and improve quality of care for NS patients.

Consequences of Insurance Denials Among U.S. Patients Prescribed Repository Corticotropin Injection for Acute Exacerbations of Multiple Sclerosis.

INTRODUCTION: Repository corticotropin injection (RCI; Acthar® Gel) is indicated for the treatment of acute exacerbations of multiple sclerosis (MS) in adults. Despite the well-documented clinical and economic benefits of RCI, many patients are denied use of the therapy by third-party payers. This study aims to understand the demographic and clinical characteristics of MS relapse patients who received a prescription for RCI from their physicians and then were either approved or denied treatment by their insurers. The study compares measurable clinical outcomes and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) between approved and denied cohorts. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of adults experiencing MS relapse from January 2015 to December 2018 was conducted using a de-identified open-source claims database [Symphony Health Integrated Dataverse® (IDV)]. Patients were identified using ICD codes for MS and considered to have relapsing/remitting type according to established claims-based methodology. Clinical characteristics and HCRU were analyzed during the year preceding ("baseline") and the year following ("follow-up") each patient's index date, defined as the date of a patient's first approved RCI claim (for patients with ≥ 1 approved claim) or first denied RCI claim (for patients with only denied claims). Baseline characteristics were reported with unadjusted differences and p values indicating the significance of characteristics between the two cohorts. For outcomes, match-adjusted results were reported using propensity matching to account for underlying differences between cohorts. RESULTS: The study sample included 1902 MS relapse patients with at least one claim for RCI. At baseline, approved patients were slightly older compared to denied patients (mean age 48.0 vs. 47.2), had higher rates of hemiplegia/paraplegia (6.7% vs. 3.3%), greater mobility impairment (17% vs. 11.5%), more exacerbation episodes (66.2% vs. 59.9%), and a higher number of physical therapy/rehab claims (23.5 vs. 14.0), respectively. Outcomes among the matched sample show an increased use of corticosteroids for patients denied access to RCI compared to approved patients (51.1% vs. 42.4%), more exacerbation episodes (36.6% vs. 28.2%), and an increased number of physical therapy/rehab claims (11.5% vs. 9.9%), respectively. CONCLUSION: The results of this study may aid providers and payers in evaluating scenarios where RCI may be beneficial and improve quality of care for patients experiencing MS relapse.

Economic Burden of Non-Infectious Inflammatory Eye Disease (NIIED) in a Commercially-Insured Population in the United States.

Purpose: To assess the economic burden of non-infectious inflammatory eyedisease (NIIED) in a commercially-insured population in the United StatesMethods: Adult patients with a NIIED diagnosis between 2006 and 2015 were selected from a de-identified, privately insured claims database and were matched 1:1 to a non-NIIED control. Ophthalmologic complications, direct healthcare resource use and costs, and indirect work loss (from the payer perspective) were calculated for a 12-month period and compared across the 2 cohorts.Results: Among the 14 876 matched pairs, NIIED patients were significantly more likely than controls to experience ocular complications, including glaucoma and cataracts (p < 0.001). NIIED patients had significantly higher healthcare resource utilization and costs compared with matched controls (relative difference 40%, p < 0.001). NIIED patients missed 12.2 days of work ($2925 annual work-loss costs), 46% more than non-NIIED patients (p < 0.001).Conclusion: NIIED imposes a significant clinical and economic burden, suggesting an unmet need for expanded access to alternative treatment options.

Predictors of High-cost Patients With Noninfectious Inflammatory Eye Diseases.

PURPOSE: Noninfectious inflammatory eye diseases (NIIEDs), such as uveitis, is a general term used to describe a complex mix of acute, chronic, allergic, and inflammatory disorders. Prior literature has established that, in addition to severe clinical burden, NIIEDs is associated with significant economic burden for US payers; however, no literature provides a current estimate of the economic burden associated with patients with high-cost NIIEDs. This study aimed to better understand the cost and resource use distribution and predictors of patients with high-cost NIIEDs. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study selected adult patients with NIIEDs from a large US administrative claims database between 2006 and 2015. Among the included patients, total all-cause health care costs were calculated for a randomly selected 12-month period. Patients in the top 20% of total all-cause health care costs were identified as high-cost patients; the remaining patients were identified as lower-cost patients. Patient demographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, cost, and health care resource utilization (HRU) were compared. Logistic regression models were used to determine characteristics associated with high-cost patients. FINDINGS: Patients with NIIEDs (n = 14,879) were categorized into 2976 high-cost and 11,903 lower-cost patients. High-cost patients with NIIEDs were significantly more likely to experience blindness, cataract, cystoid macular degeneration, retinal detachment, and visual disturbances during the follow-up period than the lower-cost patients (all P < 0.05). The high-cost patients accounted for ~77% of the total all-cause health care spend. High-cost patients incurred an average annual total health care cost of $59,873, and the top 1 percentile incurred $349,967 during the follow-up period. Hospitalization was a key cost driver among the high-cost patients, accounting for 50% of the total cost among the top 1 percentile of patients. High-cost patients were more likely to have specific autoimmune diseases, inpatient admission, and use of biologic and immunosuppressant agents. IMPLICATIONS: A small segment of patients with NIIEDs consumed most resources. This study identified several predictors based on patient characteristics and HRU that may help inform the profile of patients with NIIEDs with the highest health care needs. As such, patients with a given profile can be selected for targeted interventions by clinicians to potentially help improve quality of care and to reduce costs.

The burden of non-infectious intraocular inflammatory eye diseases: a systematic literature review.

OBJECTIVE: Non-infectious inflammatory eye diseases (IEDs), although rare, are complex and varied and may result in detrimental effects. A systematic literature review was conducted on the clinical outcome and economic burden of IED. METHODS: The Ovid search platform (Wolters Kluwer) was used to access scientific literature databases, including MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane libraries, Health Technology Assessment and the NHS Economic Evaluation database. The search strategy targeted clinical and economic outcomes research in 2009-2016. Titles and abstracts resulting from inclusion criteria were screened, and two reviewers independently extracted relevant information from the selected full-text articles. RESULTS: Thirty-nine papers met the inclusion criteria - 21 clinical trials, 7 database analyses, 6 non-systematic literature reviews with expert commentary, 3 chart reviews, and 2 surveys - which assessed steroids, immunosuppressants, implants and biologics. Patients experienced considerable morbidity, much of which was associated with corticosteroid use. The average annual healthcare costs of patients with IED were $13,728 to $32,268 in 2009 US dollars, which amounted to 3.1 to 8.3 times that of patients without IED. Steroid-releasing intraocular implants were associated with higher up-front costs, close monitoring requirements, potential for implant removal and increased rates of adverse ocular events than systemic steroids. CONCLUSIONS: IEDs are rare and complex conditions that threaten eyesight and impose considerable morbidity as well as a substantial economic burden. This review confirms that further research is needed to more fully explore the burden of IED and treatment-related adverse events, as well as appropriate means for clinicians to intensify treatment.

Quantitative characterization of the relationship between levels of extended corticosteroid use and related adverse events in a US population.

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective study assessed the incidence and timing of adverse events (AEs) among patients prescribed varying dose levels of corticosteroids in the US. METHODS: Patients with selected autoimmune or inflammatory disease diagnoses between 2006 and 2015 were identified from a privately insured administrative database. Patients were stratified into treatment cohorts based on dosage and length of corticosteroid use: intermittent use with duration <60 days, and three extended use cohorts with duration ≥60 days at low (≤7.5 mg/day), medium (>7.5-≤15 mg/day) or high (>15 mg/day) prednisone-equivalent dosage. The incidence of and time to corticosteroid-related AEs were assessed by cohort. RESULTS: A total of 78,704 patients met the selection criteria, of whom 9.5%, 11.0% and 8.6% were classified into the high-, medium-, and low-dose extended corticosteroid use cohorts, respectively. Corticosteroid exposure varied across study conditions, from 34% of dermatomyositis/polymyositis to 6% of psoriatic arthritis patients prescribed extended high dose. Hypertension, pneumonia and osteoporosis were the AEs with the highest incidence rates (41.9, 27.4 and 19.8 cases respectively per 1000 patient-months for the high-dose cohort). For most AEs, all levels of extended corticosteroid use exhibited significant risks of increased incidence compared to intermittent use. Some AEs had dose relationships, with higher dose correlated with higher incidence; other AEs had duration relationships with longer duration correlated with higher incidence regardless of dose. Average time to AE onset was relatively short, occurring at 2.3-6.7 months after corticosteroid initiation. CONCLUSIONS: Through a rigorous quantitative characterization, extended steroid exposure was associated with increased incidence and earlier onset of AEs among privately insured adults in the US.

Healthcare resource use and cost associated with varying dosages of extended corticosteroid exposure in a US population.

AIMS: To quantify healthcare resource use (HCRU) and costs associated with varying levels of corticosteroid exposure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with a diagnosis of selected autoimmune and inflammatory diseases between 1 January 2006 and 30 September 2015 ("study period") were selected from a de-identified, privately-insured claims database. Patients were stratified into four treatment cohorts based on the dosing and duration of continuous corticosteroid use following disease diagnosis: intermittent use with <60 days of corticosteroid use and ≥60 days of corticosteroid use with low (≤7.5 mg/day), medium (>7.5-≤15 mg/day), or high (>15 mg/day) dosage. Patients were followed from the date of their highest dose episode of corticosteroid use ("treatment index date") until the earliest of the end of continuous corticosteroid use +30 days, disenrollment from health plan, or the end of the study period ("follow-up period"). HCRU and costs in the follow-up period were compared across treatment cohorts. RESULTS: Of 78,704 patients who were identified for study inclusion, 29% had extended corticosteroid use lasting ≥60 days, and 71% had intermittent use. On average, patients in the high-dose cohort incurred twice the cost of intermittent users ($68,408 vs $32,690 in annualized total all-cause healthcare costs, USD). Adverse event-related medical costs accounted for ∼40% of medical costs, and were higher than disease-related medical costs for all cohorts with extended corticosteroid exposure. Comparing the high-dose and low-dose cohorts, the smaller savings in disease-related prescriptions ($1,680) occurred along with a much larger cost in adverse event-related spend ($13,464). LIMITATIONS: The impact of corticosteroids may be under-estimated because of conservative follow-up duration, and administrative data may contain inaccuracies in coding. CONCLUSIONS: Steroid use, especially at higher doses, is associated with higher HCRU and costs.

High-Cost Sarcoidosis Patients in the United States: Patient Characteristics and Patterns of Health Care Resource Utilization.

BACKGROUND: Sarcoidosis is a multisystem inflammatory disorder characterized by the presence of noncaseating granulomas in involved organs. Prior research has found that sarcoidosis imposes a significant economic burden to U.S. payers. However, the drivers of high health care costs among sarcoidosis patients are unknown. OBJECTIVE: To characterize sarcoidosis patients who were among the top 20% of total health care costs. METHODS: Patients with a first diagnosis of sarcoidosis between January 1, 1998, and March 31, 2015 (index date) were selected from a deidentified privately insured administrative claims database. Study patients must have at least 12 months of continuous health plan enrollment prior to the index date. High-cost patients were those in the top 20% of total health care costs during the 12 months following the index date (follow-up period), and the remaining patients were classified as lower-cost patients. Patient characteristics, comorbidities, health care resource use, and health care costs in the study period were compared between the high-cost and lower-cost patients. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between patient characteristics and being a high-cost sarcoidosis patient. RESULTS: A total of 7,173 sarcoidosis patients met the selection criteria. The 20% of patients classified as high-cost patients accounted for approximately 72% of the total health care costs in the 12-month follow-up period. Compared with lower-cost patients, high-cost patients were slightly older (50.6 vs. 49.1 years) and had a higher comorbidity burden at baseline (Charlson Comorbidity Index = 1.8 vs. 0.7). Mean annual total health care cost for high-cost sarcoidosis patients was 10 times that of their lower-cost counterparts ($73,345 vs. $7,073). Mean annual health care cost was $119,878 for patients in the 95th-99th percentile and $375,436 for patients in the top 1% of spend. High-cost patients had greater medical resource use and costs across all places of service (i.e., inpatient, emergency department, outpatient, and other) compared with lower-cost patients. Findings showed that higher total health care cost resulted in a larger proportion of inpatient spend and a smaller proportion of outpatient and pharmacy spend. Adjusting for baseline characteristics, high-cost patients were associated with a number of factors with high ORs: the presence of comorbidities such as deficiency anemia (OR = 1.606; P < 0.001), depression (OR = 1.504; P < 0.001), or cardiac arrhythmia (OR = 1.493; P < 0.001); having an inpatient admission (OR = 9.771; P < 0.001); and use of biologic therapies adalimumab and/or infliximab (OR = 31.821; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study described the characteristics of high-cost sarcoidosis patients and identified several high-cost indicators using contemporary administrative data. The health care cost distribution for sarcoidosis patients is highly skewed, making it a worthwhile endeavor to focus improvement efforts on patients in the top quintile. The study findings can help population health decision makers identify a subset of patients for targeted interventions aimed at improving quality of care and reducing overall costs. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals. Rice, White, and Lopez are employees of Analysis Group, which received funding from Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals to conduct this research. Nelson is an employee of Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals. Study concept and design were contributed by Rice, White, and Nelson, along with Lopez. Lopez took the lead in data collection, with assistance from Rice and White. Data interpretation was performed by all of the authors. The manuscript was written by Rice, Lopez, White, and Nelson and revised by Rice, along with White and Nelson.

Long-term Systemic Corticosteroid Exposure: A Systematic Literature Review.

PURPOSE: While corticosteroids are relatively inexpensive and commonly used as treatment for a variety of conditions, long-term use is known to be associated with certain toxicities. Prior systematic reviews have revealed an increased risk for costly adverse events (AEs), including bone fracture, infection, and gastrointestinal bleeding. The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic literature review of recent publications on the burden of long-term corticosteroid exposure, specifically, to summarize the AEs and economic impact of long-term corticosteroid use and to reveal data gaps for additional research. METHODS: The Ovid search platform was used to access scientific literature databases. The search strategy targeted the use of corticosteroids and economic outcomes research. Articles were restricted to those published between 2007 and 2016 to cover publications since prior reviews; conference abstracts and articles assessing pediatrics were excluded. Titles and abstracts resulting from inclusion criteria were screened, and reviewers independently extracted relevant information from the relevant full-text articles. FINDINGS: The literature review included 32 articles, with 75% focusing on autoimmune diseases, asthma, or lung diseases. Included articles were 14 database analyses, 6 simulations, 6 clinical trials, 3 systematic literature reviews, 2 patient surveys, and 1 chart review. Commonly-cited AEs associated with long-term corticosteroid exposure included hypertension (prevalence >30%); bone fracture (21%-30%); cataract (1%-3%); nausea, vomiting, and other gastrointestinal conditions (1%-5%); and metabolic issues (eg, weight gain, hyperglycemia, and type 2 diabetes; cases had 4-fold the risk of controls). Association of dose and duration with increased AE risk is not well-quantified. AEs like peptic ulcer and myocardial infarction are particularly costly to payers (1-year cost of $21,825 and $26,472, respectively, in year-2009 USD). The few articles assessing the economic impact of corticosteroid use have found dose-related increases in health care resource utilization and costs, with per-annum incremental costs relative to nonusers ranging from $5700 in low-dose users (<7.5 mg/d) to $29,000 in high-dose users (>15 mg/d). Adherence to treatment guidelines on avoiding AEs (eg, prescribing of oral bisphosphonates, calcium, and vitamin D) remains low. IMPLICATIONS: Although doses of long-term corticosteroids have fallen over the past several decades in response to AEs, dose reduction may not be a sufficient solution. Numerous AEs, some very costly, persist among long-term corticosteroid users, suggesting a need for further research to fill current data gaps, as well as a potential need for alternative treatment options.

Economic burden of sarcoidosis in a commercially-insured population in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Sarcoidosis is a multi-system inflammatory disorder characterized by the presence of non-caseating granulomas in involved organs. Patients with sarcoidosis have a reduced quality-of-life and are at an increased risk for several comorbidities. Little is known about the direct and indirect cost of sarcoidosis following the initial diagnosis. AIMS: To provide an estimate of the healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs borne by commercial payers for sarcoidosis patients in the US. METHODS: Patients with a first diagnosis of sarcoidosis between January 1, 1998 and March 31, 2015 ("index date") were selected from a de-identified privately-insured administrative claims database. Sarcoidosis patients were required to have continuous health plan enrollment 12 months prior to and following their index dates. Propensity-score (1:1) matching of sarcoidosis patients with non-sarcoidosis controls was carried out based on a logistic regression of baseline characteristics. Burden of HCRU and work loss (disability days and medically-related absenteeism) were compared between the matched groups over the 12-month period following the index date ("outcome period"). RESULTS: A total of 7,119 sarcoidosis patients who met the selection criteria were matched with a control. Overall, commercial payers incurred $19,714 in mean total annual healthcare costs per sarcoidosis patient. The principle cost drivers were outpatient visits ($9,050 2015 USD, 46%) and inpatient admissions ($6,398, 32%). Relative to controls, sarcoidosis patients had $5,190 (36%) higher total healthcare costs ($19,714 vs $14,524; p < 0.001). Sarcoidosis patients also had significantly more work loss days (15.9 vs 11.3; p < 0.001) and work loss costs ($3,288 vs $2,527; p < 0.001) than matched controls. Sarcoidosis imposes an estimated total direct medical cost of $1.3-$8.7 billion to commercial payers, and an indirect cost of $0.2-$1.5 billion to commercial payers in work loss. CONCLUSIONS: Sarcoidosis imposes a significant economic burden to payers in the first year following diagnosis.

The burden of hepatorenal syndrome among commercially insured and Medicare patients in the United States.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the characteristics, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and costs, from the payer perspective, of hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) patients covered by commercial and Medicare insurance. Mortality was assessed as a secondary outcome. METHODS: Patients were identified from claims databases of commercially insured patients (OptumHealth Care Solutions Inc.) in 1998-2014 and Medicare beneficiaries in 2009-2013 (5% Standard Analytic Files). At the time of their first inpatient admission ("index date") with an HRS diagnosis (ICD-9 code 572.4), commercially insured patients must be aged 18-64 and Medicare patients must be aged 65 and older. RESULTS: A total of 784 commercially insured and 1061 Medicare HRS patients met the sample selection criteria. Patients were disproportionately male (commercial: 63.0%; Medicare: 57.9%) with a mean age of 54.1 among commercially insured and 74.1 among Medicare patients. Within the first 30 days, the average hospital length of stay (LOS) was 12.3 days among commercially insured and 10.8 days among Medicare patients. Based on Kaplan-Meier analyses, 36% of commercially insured and 26% of Medicare patients were readmitted within the next 30 days. During follow-up, many patients received dialysis (commercial: 33.0%; Medicare: 22.1%) or liver transplant (commercial: 10.7%; Medicare: 1.6%). Average costs within the 90 day follow-up were $157,665 for commercially insured and $48,322 for Medicare patients, with 68.3% and 78.3% of the costs incurred within the first 30 days. The primary cost driver was inpatient visits (commercial: 90.3% of costs; Medicare: 83.1% of costs), with differences between the populations consistent with lower mortality, higher dialysis rates, and higher transplant rates (both liver and kidney) among the commercially insured. Using US population and prevalence statistics, these results suggest that HRS imposes an annual total direct medical cost burden of approximately $3.0-$3.8 billion to payers over the period. CONCLUSIONS: HRS imposes a significant economic burden.

Characteristics of High-Cost Patients Diagnosed with Opioid Abuse.

BACKGROUND: Prescription opioid abuse is associated with substantial economic burden, with estimates of incremental annual per-patient health care costs of diagnosed opioid abuse exceeding $10,000 in prior literature. A subset of patients diagnosed with opioid abuse has disproportionately high health care costs, but little is known about the characteristics of these patients.  OBJECTIVE: To describe the characteristics of a subset of patients diagnosed with opioid abuse with disproportionately high health care costs to assist physicians and managed care organizations in targeting interventions at the costliest patients. METHODS: This retrospective claims data analysis identified patients aged 12 to 64 years diagnosed with opioid abuse/dependence in the OptumHealth Reporting and Insights medical and pharmacy claims database, Quarter 1 (Q1) 1999-Q1 2012. Inclusion criteria required that patients had a diagnosis of opioid abuse during or after Q1 2006, no prior diagnoses of opioid abuse, and continuous non-HMO coverage over an 18-month study period. The study period comprised a 12-month observation period centered on the date of the first opioid abuse diagnosis (index date) and a 6-month baseline period immediately preceding the observation period. Patients in the top 20% of total health care costs in the observation period were classified as "high-cost patients," and the remaining patients were classified as "lower-cost patients." Patient characteristics, comorbidities, health care resource use, and health care costs were compared between high-cost patients and lower-cost patients using chi-square tests for dichotomous variables and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests for continuous variables. In addition, multivariate regression was used to assess the relationship between patient characteristics in the baseline period and total health care costs in the observation period among all patients diagnosed with opioid abuse.  RESULTS: 9,291 patients diagnosed with opioid abuse met the inclusion criteria. The 20% of patients classified as high-cost patients accounted for approximately two thirds of the total health care costs of patients diagnosed with opioid abuse. Compared with lower-cost patients, high-cost patients were older (42.5 vs. 36.1; P less than 0.001) and more likely to be female (55.9% vs. 42.9%; P less than 0.001). They had a higher comorbidity burden at baseline, as reflected in the Charlson Comorbidity Index (0.8 vs. 0.2; P less than 0.001), and rates of conditions such as chronic pulmonary disease (12.9% vs. 5.6%; P less than 0.001) and mild/moderate diabetes (8.4% vs. 3.4%; P less than 0.001). High-cost patients also had higher rates of nonopioid substance abuse diagnoses (12.4% vs. 8.9%; P less than 0.001) and psychotic disorders (26.5% vs. 13.6%; P less than 0.001). In the observation period, high-cost patients continued to have higher rates of nonopioid substance abuse diagnoses (53.0% vs. 47.2%; P less than 0.001) and psychotic disorders (67.1% vs. 47.5%; P less than 0.001). In addition, they had greater medical resource use across all places of service (i.e., inpatient, emergency department, outpatient, drug/alcohol rehabilitation facility, and other) compared with lower-cost patients. The mean observation period health care costs of high-cost patients was $89,177 compared with $11,653 for lower-cost patients (P less than 0.001). High-cost patients had higher medical costs linked to claims with an opioid abuse diagnosis in absolute terms, but the share of total medical costs attributed to such claims was lower among high-cost patients than among lower-cost patients. While many baseline characteristics were found to have a statistically significant (P less than 0.05) association with observation period health care costs, only 27.3% of the variation in observation period health care costs was explained by patient characteristics in the baseline period. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that the costliest patients diagnosed with opioid abuse had high rates of preexisting and concurrent chronic comorbidities and mental health conditions, suggesting potential indicators for targeted intervention and a need for greater awareness and screening of comorbid conditions. Opioid abuse may exacerbate existing conditions and make it difficult for patients to adhere to treatment plans for those underlying conditions. Baseline patient characteristics explained only a small share of the variation in observation period health care costs, however. Future research should explore the degree to which other factors not captured in administrative claims data (e.g., severity of abuse) can explain the wide variation in health care costs among opioid abusers.

The Burden of Undiagnosed Opioid Abuse Among Commercially Insured Individuals.

OBJECTIVES: Estimate the prevalence and healthcare costs of undiagnosed opioid abuse among commercially insured individuals. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of de-identified pharmacy and medical claims data and publicly-available survey data (no IRB approval required). METHODS: This study focused on commercially insured individuals. Rates of prescription pain-reliever abuse/dependence ("abuse") among individuals ages ≥12 were calculated using National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) public-use data for 2006-2011 and assumed to capture both diagnosed and undiagnosed opioid abuse. Rates of undiagnosed opioid abuse were calculated as the difference between NSDUH rates and published rates of diagnosed opioid abuse. OptumHealth Reporting and Insights claims data were used to estimate the healthcare costs of undiagnosed abuse. Diagnosed abusers ages 12-64 were identified using ICD-9-CM diagnosis codes for opioid abuse/dependence. Pre-diagnosis costs were assumed to be a proxy for undiagnosed opioid abuse costs. The ratio of undiagnosed to diagnosed abuse costs was calculated as the ratio of annual per-patient healthcare costs between pre-diagnosis and post-diagnosis periods. RESULTS: While rates of diagnosed opioid abuse among commercially insured individuals increased from 0.07% in 2006 to 0.19% in 2011, rates of undiagnosed abuse decreased from 0.42% to 0.38% over the same time period. Annual per-patient healthcare costs of undiagnosed abusers were 69.2% of those of diagnosed abusers. CONCLUSIONS: Per-patient healthcare costs of undiagnosed abusers among the commercially insured are estimated to be lower than those of diagnosed abusers. However, the higher prevalence of undiagnosed opioid abuse implies that undiagnosed abuse represents a substantial burden to commercial payers.

Economic outcomes among Medicare patients receiving bioengineered cellular technologies for treatment of diabetic foot ulcers.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the real-world medical services utilization and associated costs of Medicare patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) treated with Apligraf (bioengineered living cellular construct (BLCC)) or Dermagraft (human fibroblast-derived dermal substitute (HFDS)) compared with those receiving conventional care (CC). METHODS: DFU patients were selected from Medicare de-identified administrative claims using ICD-9-CM codes. The analysis followed an 'intent-to-treat' design, with cohorts assigned based on use of (1) BLCC, (2) HFDS, or (3) CC (i.e., ≥1 claim for a DFU-related treatment procedure or podiatrist visit and no evidence of skin substitute use) for treatment of DFU in 2006-2012. Propensity score models were used to separately match BLCC and HFDS patients to CC patients with similar baseline demographics, wound severity, and physician experience measures. Medical resource use, lower-limb amputation rates, and total healthcare costs (2012 USD; from payer perspective) during the 18 months following treatment initiation were compared among the resulting matched samples. RESULTS: Data for 502 matched BLCC-CC patient pairs and 222 matched HFDS-CC patient pairs were analyzed. Increased costs associated with outpatient service utilization relative to matched CC patients were offset by lower amputation rates (-27.6% BLCC, -22.2% HFDS), fewer days hospitalized (-33.3% BLCC, -42.4% HFDS), and fewer emergency department visits (-32.3% BLCC, -25.7% HFDS) among BLCC/HFDS patients. Consequently, BLCC and HFDS patients had per-patient average healthcare costs during the 18-month follow-up period that were lower than their respective matched CC counterparts (-$5253 BLCC, -$6991 HFDS). LIMITATIONS: Findings relied on accuracy of diagnosis and procedure codes contained in the claims data, and did not account for outcomes and costs beyond 18 months after treatment initiation. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that use of BLCC and HFDS for treatment of DFU may lower overall medical costs through reduced utilization of costly healthcare services.