Comparison of Healthcare Costs for Women with Treated Versus Untreated Vasomotor Symptoms Due to Menopause.

INTRODUCTION: The study objective was to estimate all-cause healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and medical and pharmacy costs for women with treated versus untreated vasomotor symptoms (VMS) due to menopause. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted using US claims data from Optum Research Database (study period: January 1, 2012-February 29, 2020). Women aged 40-63 years with a VMS diagnosis claim and ≥ 12 and ≥ 18 months of continuous enrollment during baseline and follow-up periods, respectively, were included. Women treated for VMS were propensity score matched 1:1 to untreated controls with VMS. Standardized differences (SDIFF) ≥ 10% were considered meaningful. A generalized linear model (gamma distribution, log link, robust standard errors) estimated the total cost of care ratio. Subgroup analyses of on- and off-label treatment costs were conducted. RESULTS: Of 117,582 women diagnosed with VMS, 20.5% initiated VMS treatment and 79.5% had no treatment. Treated women (n = 24,057) were matched to untreated VMS controls. There were no differences in HCRU at follow-up (SDIFF < 10%). Pharmacy ($487 vs $320, SDIFF 28.4%) and total ($1803 vs $1536, SDIFF 12.6%) costs were higher in the treated cohort. Total costs were 7% higher in the treated cohort (total cost ratio 1.07, 95% CI 1.05-1.10, P < 0.001). The on-label treatment pharmacy costs ($546 versus $315, SDIFF 38.6%) were higher in the treated cohort. Off-label treatment had higher medical costs ($1393 versus $1201, SDIFF 10.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Most women with VMS due to menopause were not treated within 6 months following diagnosis. While both on- and off-label treatment increased the total cost of care compared with untreated controls, those increases were modest in magnitude and should not impede treatment for women who report symptom improvement as a result of treatment.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of fezolinetant with hormone and nonhormone therapies for treatment of vasomotor symptoms due to menopause.

IMPORTANCE: The neurokinin 3 receptor antagonist fezolinetant 45 mg/d significantly reduced frequency/severity of moderate to severe vasomotor symptoms (VMS) of menopause compared with placebo in two phase 3 randomized controlled trials. Its efficacy relative to available therapies is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis to compare efficacy with fezolinetant 45 mg and hormone therapy (HT) and non-HT for VMS in postmenopausal women. EVIDENCE REVIEW: Using OvidSP, we systematically searched multiple databases for phase 3 or 4 randomized controlled trials in postmenopausal women with ≥7 moderate to severe VMS per day or ≥50 VMS per week published/presented in English through June 25, 2021. Mean change in frequency and severity of moderate to severe VMS from baseline to week 12 and proportion of women with ≥75% reduction in VMS frequency at week 12 were assessed using fixed-effect models. FINDINGS: The network meta-analysis included data from the pooled phase 3 fezolinetant trials plus 23 comparator publications across the outcomes analyzed (frequency, 19 [34 regimens]; severity, 6 [7 regimens]; ≥75% response, 9 [15 regimens]). Changes in VMS frequency did not differ significantly between fezolinetant 45 mg and any of the 27 HT regimens studied. Fezolinetant 45 mg reduced the frequency of moderate to severe VMS events per day significantly more than all non-HTs evaluated: paroxetine 7.5 mg (mean difference [95% credible interval {CrI}], 1.66 [0.63-2.71]), desvenlafaxine 50 to 200 mg (mean differences [95% CrI], 1.12 [0.10-2.13] to 2.16 [0.90-3.40]), and gabapentin ER 1800 mg (mean difference [95% CrI], 1.63 [0.48-2.81]), and significantly more than placebo (mean difference, 2.78 [95% CrI], 1.93-3.62]). Tibolone 2.5 mg (the only HT regimen evaluable for severity) significantly reduced VMS severity compared with fezolinetant 45 mg. Fezolinetant 45 mg significantly reduced VMS severity compared with desvenlafaxine 50 mg and placebo and did not differ significantly from higher desvenlafaxine doses or gabapentin ER 1800 mg. For ≥75% responder rates, fezolinetant 45 mg was less effective than tibolone 2.5 mg (not available in the United States) and conjugated estrogens 0.625 mg/bazedoxifene 20 mg (available only as 0.45 mg/20 mg in the United States), did not differ significantly from other non-HT regimens studied and was superior to desvenlafaxine 50 mg and placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The only HT regimens that showed significantly greater efficacy than fezolinetant 45 mg on any of the outcomes analyzed are not available in the United States. Fezolinetant 45 mg once daily was statistically significantly more effective than other non-HTs in reducing the frequency of moderate to severe VMS. RELEVANCE: These findings may inform decision making with regard to the individualized management of bothersome VMS due to menopause.

Association of menopausal vasomotor symptom severity with sleep and work impairments: a US survey.

OBJECTIVE: Menopausal vasomotor symptoms commonly disrupt sleep and affect daytime productivity. This online survey evaluated associations between vasomotor symptom severity and perceived sleep quality and work productivity. METHODS: Participants were perimenopausal or postmenopausal US women aged 40 to 65 years with ≥14 vasomotor symptom episodes per week for ≥1 week in the past month. The women, who were recruited from Dynata panels via email invitation and categorized by vasomotor symptom severity based on the Menopause Rating Scale, were surveyed about sleep and work productivity and completed the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Sleep Disturbance Short Form 8b (primary outcome) and Sleep-Related Impairment Short Form 8a, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire. RESULTS: Among 619 respondents (mean age, 53 y; White, 91%; perimenopausal, 34%; postmenopausal, 66%; 57.5% were never treated for vasomotor symptoms), vasomotor symptoms were mild in 88, moderate in 266, and severe in 265. A majority (58% overall) were employed, including 64.8%, 49.6%, and 64.2% of women with mild, moderate, and severe VMS, respectively. Of the 90.8% who reported that vasomotor symptoms affect sleep (81.8%, 86.8%, and 97.7% of those with mild, moderate, and severe VMS), 83.1% reported sleep-related changes in productivity (75.0%, 73.2%, and 94.2%, respectively). Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Sleep Disturbance Short Form 8b mean T scores in the mild (T score, 53.5), moderate (57.3), and severe (59.8) VMS cohorts indicated more sleep disturbance than in the general population (T score, 50; overall P < 0.001 before and after controlling for confounding variables). Sleep-Related Impairment 8a results were similar. Vasomotor symptom severity was positively associated with Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index mean scores, presenteeism, absenteeism, overall work impairment, and impairment in general activities. CONCLUSIONS: Greater vasomotor symptom severity was associated with more sleep disturbance, more sleep-related impairment, worse sleep quality, and greater impairment in daytime activities and work productivity.

Assessment of women's treatment preferences for vasomotor symptoms due to menopause.

BACKGROUND: Several therapies for vasomotor symptoms (VMS) due to menopause are available. Treatment preferences and willingness-to-pay for VMS treatment among US women with VMS were evaluated. METHODS: An online survey of women with perimenopausal or postmenopausal VMS was conducted (3/15/21-4/23/21). A discrete choice experiment quantified the impact of 7 treatment attributes on VMS treatment choice: VMS frequency/severity reduction, sleep improvement, risk of breast cancer/cardiovascular events in 6 years, risk of short-term side effects, and out-of-pocket costs. Preference weights (PWs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated and reported. RESULTS: Among 467 women, 86.5% and 87.8% reported moderate to very severe VMS and sleep problems during the preceding month, respectively. Sleep improvement (PW: 0.843; 95% CI: 0.721, 0.965) and reduction in VMS frequency (PW: 0.658; 95% CI: 0.520, 0.796) and severity (PW: 0.628; 95% CI: 0.500, 0.756) most influenced treatment preference; risk of cardiovascular events (PW: 0.150; 95% CI: 0.069, 0.232) or breast cancer (PW: 0.401; 95% CI: 0.306, 0.496) in 6 years had lesser effect. Willingness-to-pay was an additional $35-$46/month for substantially improved sleep, 80% VMS frequency reduction, and reduction from severe to mild VMS. CONCLUSIONS: Sleep improvement and reductions in VMS frequency/severity were the most important treatment attributes.

Hormone and non-hormone treatments are available to reduce vasomotor symptoms (hot flashes and night sweats) due to menopause. We conducted an online survey of 467 women with moderate to very severe vasomotor symptoms during perimenopause or postmenopause to learn what treatment attributes are most important to women when selecting from among the available therapies and how much women were willing to pay for the attributes. Women were shown 14 cards, each with a side-by-side comparison of 2 treatments with varying descriptions of the following 7 treatment attributes: reduction in frequency of vasomotor symptoms, reduction in severity of vasomotor symptoms, improvement in sleep, risk of breast cancer in 6 years, risk of cardiovascular events in 6 years, risk of short-term side effects, and out-of-pocket costs. Women picked their preferred treatment on each card. Results showed that improvement in sleep was the most important attribute to women, and they were willing to pay an extra $46/month for a treatment that substantially improved sleep. The next most important attributes were reduction in frequency and reduction in severity of vasomotor symptoms. Women were willing to pay $36/month more for a treatment that reduced symptom frequency by 80% compared with one that reduced frequency by 50%, and they were willing to pay $35/month more for treatment that reduced symptoms from severe to mild compared with one that did not reduce symptom severity. These results may help guide development of new treatment options and may help physicians recommend treatments that best fit women's preferences.

Association between vasomotor symptom frequency and weight gain in the Study of Women's Health Across the Nation.

OBJECTIVE: The menopause transition is associated with weight gain in women. We examined whether changes in vasomotor symptom (VMS) frequency precede weight changes. METHODS: This longitudinal retrospective analysis included data from the multisite, multiethnic Study of Women's Health Across the Nation. Women in premenopause or perimenopause aged 42 to 52 years at baseline self-reported VMS frequency (hot flashes/night sweats) and sleep problems at up to 10 annual visits. Menopause status, weight, body mass index, and waist circumference were compared across visits. The primary objective was to measure the association between VMS frequency and weight gain using a lagged approach with first-difference regression models. Secondary objectives were to statistically quantify mediation by sleep problems and moderation by menopause status and explore the association between cumulative, 10-year VMS exposure and long-term weight gain. RESULTS: The primary analysis sample included 2,361 participants (12,030 visits; 1995-2008). Increased VMS frequency across visits was associated with subsequently increased weight (0.24 kg), body mass index (0.08 kg/m 2 ), and waist circumference (0.20 cm). Cumulative exposure to a high frequency of VMS (≥6 d/2 wk) over 10 consecutive annual visits was associated with increases in weight measures, including a 3.0-cm increase in waist circumference. Contemporaneous sleep problems mediated no more than 27% of waist circumference increases. Menopause status was not a consistent moderator. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that increases in VMS, onset of a high frequency of VMS, and persistent VMS symptoms over time may precede weight gain in women.

Practice patterns and perspectives regarding treatment for symptoms of menopause: qualitative interviews with US health care providers.

OBJECTIVE: To document health care providers' views regarding treatments for symptoms associated with menopause and discussions with patients about symptoms and treatment decisions. Results informed development of a data collection form for a retrospective medical record review (reported separately). METHODS: Registered US gynecologists or primary care providers from all US regions were identified from local association directories and an in-house database and were invited to participate in a qualitative interview if they consulted with three or more patients per week presenting with menopausal symptoms. Participants provided demographic data, information about patients' symptoms, and health care provider and patient views on prescription and nonprescription therapies. Key concepts/themes from interviews were identified. RESULTS: Participating health care providers (10 gynecologists, 10 primary care providers) agreed there are effective treatment options for menopausal symptoms, particularly vasomotor symptoms and vaginal dryness and/or atrophy. Health care providers reported that treatment was generally dictated by symptoms that interfered with quality of life and/or daily activities, although patients often had symptoms for months before presentation. All health care providers said they prescribe hormone and/or nonhormone therapies for treatment of menopausal symptoms; half stated that they typically inquire about patients' nonprescription therapy use, and 45% recommend specific nonprescription therapies. The most commonly cited barriers to initiation of any therapy for menopausal symptoms were patient concerns about risks and financial considerations (ie, insurance or cost). CONCLUSIONS: US health care providers reported prescribing therapies for menopausal symptoms and noted that these therapies were perceived as generally effective; however, barriers to initiation of prescription therapy exist, and new treatment options are needed.

Treatment and resource utilization for menopausal symptoms in the United States: a retrospective review of real-world evidence from US electronic health records.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to generate real-world evidence documenting use of prescription and nonprescription therapies recorded by health care providers for women experiencing vasomotor symptoms (VMS) associated with menopause. METHODS: This noninterventional, retrospective, observational cohort study used data from US patient medical records. Participating health care providers were gynecologists, internal medicine/family physicians, or advanced practice providers who typically saw three or more women per week presenting with menopausal symptoms and could identify eligible medical records; providers were recruited from local medical association directories and from listings from previously conducted research. Eligible women presented January 2016 through December 2019, were 40 to 60 years of age, and reported experiencing bothersome hot flashes at least twice within 24 hours. RESULTS: A total of 283 health care providers provided data for 1,016 women. The most common symptoms at initial presentation were hot flashes (91.2%), sleep problems (49.9%), and vaginal dryness (47.0%). At least one therapy for menopausal symptoms was recorded for 883 women (86.9%), and 611 (60.1%) had documentation of prescription medication, most commonly hormone therapy (70.4%). Nearly 40% of women had no prescription medication documented, and approximately 13% had no therapy documented. Despite experiencing bothersome menopausal symptoms, approximately 50% delayed seeking care for more than 6 months. Women had a mean of 2.1 (SD, 2.0) office visits related to menopause from initial presentation to completion of review, and health care resource utilization did not vary by treatment status. Subgroup analyses indicated nominal differences in treatment use across ethnic groups and varying prescribing patterns for menopausal symptoms by practitioner type and US region. CONCLUSIONS: A high proportion of women with VMS remain untreated even when experiencing bothersome symptoms of menopause. Improved management of VMS is required to provide relief from the symptoms effectively and safely.