The economic burden of psoriasis with high comorbidity among privately insured patients in the United States

Objective: To evaluate the impact of comorbidities on healthcare resource use (HRU), and direct and indirect work-loss-related costs in psoriasis patients.

Methods: Adults with psoriasis (≥2 diagnoses, the first designated as the index date) and non-psoriasis controls (no psoriasis diagnoses, randomly generated index date) were identified in a US healthcare claims database of privately-insured patients (data between January 2010 and March 2017 were used). Psoriasis patients were stratified based on the number of psoriasis-related comorbidities (0, 1–2, or ≥3) developed during the 12?months post-index. All outcomes were evaluated during the follow-up period, spanning the index date until the end of continuous health plan eligibility or data cut-off. HRU and costs per-patient-per-year (PPPY) were compared in psoriasis and non-psoriasis patients with ≥12?months of follow-up.

Results: A total of 9,078 psoriasis (mean age?=?44?years, 51% female) and 48,704 non-psoriasis (mean age?=?41?years, 50% female) patients were selected. During the 12?months post-index, among psoriasis vs non-psoriasis patients, 71.0% vs 83.0% developed no psoriasis-related comorbidities, 26.3% vs 16.0% developed 1–2, and 2.6% vs 1.0% developed ≥3 psoriasis-related comorbidities. Compared to non-psoriasis patients, psoriasis patients had more HRU including outpatient visits (incidence rate ratios [IRRs]?=?1.52, 2.03, and 2.66 for 0, 1–2, and ≥3 comorbidities, respectively [all p?p?p?p?Conclusions: HRU and cost burden of psoriasis are substantial, and increase with the development of psoriasis-related comorbidities.     

The economic burden of switching targeted disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs among rheumatoid arthritis patients

Aims: To estimate real world healthcare costs and resource utilization of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients associated with targeted disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (tDMARD) switching in general and switching to abatacept specifically.

Materials and methods: RA patients initiating a tDMARD were identified in IMS PharMetrics Plus health insurance claims data (2010–2016), and outcomes measured included monthly healthcare costs per patient (all-cause, RA-related) and resource utilization (inpatient stays, outpatient visits, emergency department [ED] visits). Generalized linear models were used to assess (i) average monthly costs per patient associated with tDMARD switching, and (ii) among switchers only, costs of switching to abatacept vs tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) or other non-TNFi. Negative binomial regressions were used to determine incident rate ratios of resource utilization associated with switching to abatacept.

Results: Among 11,856 RA patients who initiated a tDMARD, 2,708 switched tDMARDs once and 814 switched twice (to a third tDMARD). Adjusted average monthly costs were higher among patients who switched to a second tDMARD vs non-switchers (all-cause: $4,785 vs $3,491, p?p?p?p?=?.021), and numerically lower all-cause costs ($4,444 vs $4,741, p?=?0.188). Switchers to TNFi relative to abatacept had more frequent inpatient stays after switch (incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 1.85, p?=?.031), and numerically higher ED visits (IRR = 1.32, p?=?.093). Outpatient visits were less frequent for TNFi switchers (IRR = 0.83, p?Limitations and conclusions: Switching to another tDMARD was associated with higher healthcare costs. Switching to abatacept, however, was associated with lower RA-related costs, fewer inpatient stays, but more frequent outpatient visits compared to switching to a TNFi.     

Annual acquisition and administration cost of biologic response modifiers per patient with rheumatoid arthritis,psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis,or ankylosing spondylitis

Abstract

Objective:

To estimate annual biologic response modifier (BRM) cost per treated patient with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, and/or ankylosing spondylitis receiving etanercept, abatacept, adalimumab, certolizumab, golimumab, infliximab, rituximab, or ustekinumab.

Methods:

This was a cohort study of 69,349 commercially insured individuals in a nationwide claims database with one of these conditions that had a claim for one of these BRMs between January 2008 and December 2010 (the index BRM/index date). Cost per treated patient was calculated as the total BRM acquisition and administration cost to the payer in the first year after the index date (including costs of other BRMs after switching) divided by the number of patients who received the index BRM. Etanercept was selected as the reference for comparisons.

Results:

Etanercept was the most commonly used index BRM (n?=?32,298; 47%), followed by adalimumab (n?=?20,582; 30%), infliximab (n?=?11,157; 16%), abatacept (n?=?2633; 4%), rituximab (n?=?1359; 2%), golimumab (n?=?687; <1%), ustekinumab (n?=?388; <1%), and certolizumab (n?=?245; <1%). Using etanercept as the reference, the cost per treated patient in the first year across all four conditions was 102% for adalimumab and 108% for infliximab. Newer BRMs had costs relative to etanercept that were 90% to 102% for rheumatoid arthritis, 132% for psoriasis, 100% for psoriatic arthritis, and 94% for ankylosing spondylitis.

Limitations:

Potential study limitations were the lack of clinical information (e.g., disease severity, treatment outcomes) or indirect costs, the inability to compare costs of newer BRMs across all four conditions, and much smaller sample sizes for newer BRMs.

Conclusions:

Of the BRMs that are approved for indications within all four conditions studied, etanercept had the lowest cost per treated patient when assessed across all four conditions.     

The economic burden of depression among adults with rheumatoid arthritis in the United States

Aims: Depression is the most frequent comorbidity reported among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Comorbid depression negatively impacts RA patients’ health-related quality-of-life, physical function, mental function, mortality, and experience of pain and symptom severity. The objective of this study was to assess healthcare utilization, expenditures, and work productivity among patients with RA with or without depression.

Materials and methods: Data from adult patients who had at least two visits each related to RA and depression over a 1-year period were extracted from the Truven Health MarketScan research databases. Outcomes comprised healthcare resource utilization, work productivity loss, and direct healthcare costs comparing patients with RA with depression (n?=?3,478) vs patients with RA without depression (n?=?43,222).

Results: Patients with RA and depression had a significantly greater relative risk of hospitalization and number of all-cause and RA-related hospitalizations, utilization of emergency services, days spent in the hospital, physician visits, and RA-related surgeries compared with RA patients without depression. Patients with RA and depression had a higher risk of and experienced more events and days of short-term disability compared with patients without depression. The incremental adjusted annual all-cause and RA-related direct costs were $8,488 (95% CI = $6,793–$10,223) and $578 (95% CI = –$98–$1,243), respectively, when comparing patients with RA and depression vs RA only.

Limitations: The current analysis is subject to the known limitations of retrospective studies based on administrative claims data.

Conclusions: This study suggested increased healthcare utilization, work productivity loss, and economic burden among RA patients due to comorbid depression. These findings emphasize the importance of managing depression and including depression as a factor when devising treatment algorithms for patients with RA.     

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?p?p?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 economic burden of brain metastasis among lung cancer patients in the United States

Objective:

Brain metastases among lung cancer patients can impair cognitive and functional ability, complicate care, and reduce survival. This study focuses on the economic burden of brain metastasis in lung cancer—direct healthcare costs to payers and indirect costs to patients, payers, and employers—in the US.

Methods:

Retrospective study using claims data from over 60 self-insured Fortune 500 companies across all US census regions (January 1999–March 2013). Adult, non-elderly lung cancer patients with brain metastasis were evaluated over two study periods: (1) pre-diagnosis (≤30 days prior to first observed lung cancer diagnosis to ≤30 days prior to first-observed brain metastasis diagnosis) and (2) post-diagnosis (≤30 days prior to first observed brain metastasis diagnosis to end of continuous eligibility or observation).

Outcome measures:

Healthcare costs to payers and resource utilization, salary loss to patients, disability payouts for payers, and productivity loss to employers.

Results:

A total of 132 patients were followed for a median of 8.4 and 6.6 months in the pre- and post-diagnosis periods, respectively. At diagnosis of brain metastasis, 21.2% of patients were on leave of absence and 6.1% on long-term disability leave. Substantial differences were observed in the pre- vs post-diagnosis periods. Specifically, patients incurred much greater healthcare utilization in the post-diagnosis period, resulting in $25,579 higher medical costs per-patient-per-6-months (PPP6M). During this period, patients missed significantly more work days, generating an incremental burden of $2853 PPP6M in salary loss for patients, $2557 PPP6M in disability payments for payers, and $4570 PPP6M in productivity loss for employers.

Limitations:

Type of primary lung cancer and extent of brain metastasis could not be assessed in the data. The analysis was also limited to patients with comprehensive disability coverage.

Conclusions:

Development of brain metastasis among lung cancer patients is associated with a substantial economic burden to payers, patients, and employers.     

Indirect cost-effectiveness analyses of abatacept and rituximab in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis in the United States

Abstract

Objective: To estimate the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for abatacept and rituximab, in combination with methotrexate, relative to methotrexate alone in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods: A patient-level simulation model was used to depict the progression of functional disability over the lifetimes of women aged 55–64 years with active RA and inadequate response to a tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α antagonist therapy. Future health-state utilities and medical care costs were based on projected values of the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI). Patients were assumed to receive abatacept or rituximab in combination with methotrexate until death or therapy discontinuation due to lack of efficacy or adverse events. HAQ-DI improvement at month 6, after adjustments for control drug (methotrexate) response, was derived from two clinical trials. Costs of medical care and biologic drugs, discounted at 3% annually, were from the perspective of a US third-party payer and expressed in 2007 US dollars.

Results: Relative to methotrexate alone, abatacept/methotrexate and rituximab/methotrexate therapies were estimated to yield an average of 1.25 and 1.10 additional QALYs per patient, at mean incremental costs of $58,989 and $60,380, respectively. The incremental cost-utility ratio relative to methotrexate was $47,191 (95% CI $44,810–49,920) per QALY gained for abatacept/methotrexate and $54,891 (95% CI $52,274–58,073) per QALY gained for rituximab/methotrexate. At an acceptability threshold of $50,000 per QALY, the probability of cost effectiveness was 90% for abatacept and 0.0% for rituximab.

Conclusion: Abatacept was estimated to be more cost effective than rituximab for use in RA from a US third-party payer perspective. However, head-to-head clinical trials and long-term observational data are needed to confirm these findings.     

An epidemiological and healthcare utilisation study of rheumatoid arthritis in an adult population in the US

Summary

This study estimated the incidence of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in a US population comprising adults from the MarketScan Research Database®*. The incidence population included subjects with no RA-related medical claims or treatment history during 2001–2002. Among the incidence population, patients with RA in 2003 made up the newly diagnosed RA population and patients with RA for more than 3 years comprised the longstanding RA population.

The age- and sex-adjusted RA incidence based on the 2002 US population was 0.08% (0.06% in males; 0.11% in females); the age- and sex-adjusted prevalence was 0.73% (0.43% in males; 0.98% in females). The prevalence-to-incidence ratio was 9.1 (7.2 in males; 8.9 in females). Treatment with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and biologicals, respectively, was documented in 36.7, 17.7 and 2.5% of newly diagnosed patients within 12 months after initial diagnosis and in 68.2, 87.3 and 34.4%, respectively, of patients with longstanding RA.

Management of existing RA cases remains a challenge, with only a small proportion of new cases receiving standard treatment.     

Healthcare costs and resource utilization in patients with severe aplastic anemia in the US

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs for patients with severe aplastic anemia (SAA) using US claims data.

Methods: This retrospective, observational database study analyzed claims data from the Truven MarketScan databases. SAA patients aged ≥2?years identified between 2014 and 2017 who were continuously enrolled for 6?months before their first SAA treatment or blood transfusion, with a ≥6-month follow-up, were included. Baseline demographics and comorbidities were evaluated. Monthly all-cause and SAA-related HCRU and direct costs in the follow-up period were analyzed and differences were presented for all patients and across age groups.

Results: With an average follow-up period of 21.5?months, 939 patients were included in the study. Monthly all-cause and SAA-related HCRU [mean (SD)] were 1.65 days (2.61 days) and 0.18 days (0.70 days) for length of stay, 0.18 (0.23) and 0.01 (0.04) for hospital admissions, 0.25 (0.30) and 0.02 (0.07) for ER visits, 2.24 (1.40) and 0.46 (0.99) for office visits, and 2.90 (2.64) and 0.55 (1.31) for outpatient visits, respectively. On average, SAA patients received 0.15 (0.57) blood transfusions per month. Mean monthly all-cause direct costs were $28,280 USD ($36,127) [US dollars, mean (SD)]. Direct costs related to admissions were $11,433 USD (SD $25,040), followed by $624 USD ($1,703) for ER visits, $528 USD ($694) for office visits, $7,615 USD ($13,273) for outpatient visits, and $5,998 USD ($11,461) for pharmacy expenses. Monthly SAA-related direct costs averaged $7,884 USD (SD $16,254); of these costs, $1,608 USD ($7,774) were from admissions, $47 USD ($257) from ER visits, $127 USD ($374) from office visits, $1,462 USD ($4,994) from outpatient visits, and $4,451 USD ($10,552) from pharmacy expenses.

Conclusion: SAA is associated with high economic burden, with costs comparable to blood malignancies, implying that US health plans should consider appropriately managing SAA while constraining the total healthcare costs when making formulary decisions.     

Indirect and non-medical economic burden,quality-of-life,and disabilities of the myelofibrosis disease in Spain

Introduction:

Myelofibrosis is a non-frequent chronic myeloproliferative Philadelphia-negative chromosome neoplasm. It is a heavy incapacitating orphan disease and associated with high morbidity and mortality. In this context, indirect and non-medical costs are expected to be high. The main objective of this project is to estimate the economic burden of this disease in Spain.

Methods:

Thirty-three patients with a diagnosis of myelofibrosis for at least 1 year participated in a questionnaire in three Spanish centers. The study consisted of analyzing in various aspects the cost and impact of the disease; indeed, daily life time limitations with a need of informal care, symtomatology. Additionally, information concerning the clinical management of the disease was collected through a focus group of eight experts.

Results:

The mean age was 65 years. 15 of 33 patients were at their productive stage. Six had difficulties at work and eight have received informal care. Bone and muscular pain were the main symptoms of patients (72%). The estimated global indirect and non-medical costs of the disease were 86,315€ per patient (20% working and 80% informal care), which reached 104,153€ at productive stage patients (45%) and 168,459€ for more symptomatic patients.

Conclusions:

The economic burden of indirect and non-medical costs of myelofibrosis are important (15,142€/annual) as a result, and should be considered in economic evaluation, as well as in preventive plans for patients and caregivers, despite the fact that studies with larger numbers of patients should be done.     

A cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis of apremilast in patients with psoriatic arthritis in Italy

Abstract

Aims: The aim of this study was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis, as well as a budget impact analysis, on the use of apremilast for the treatment of adult patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), within the Italian National Health Service (NHS).

Methods: A Markov state transition cohort model, which was adapted to the Italian context, was used to compare the costs of the currently available treatments and of the patients’ quality of life with two alternative treatment sequences, with or without apremilast as pre-biologic therapy. Moreover, a budget impact model was developed based on the population of patients treated for PsA in Italy, who can be eligible for treatment with apremilast. The eligible population was represented by adult patients with PsA who had an inadequate response to or were intolerant to previous disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), for the approved indication, and for the treatment studied in the economic analytic model.

Results: This cost-effectiveness analysis estimated that the strategy of using apremilast before biologic therapy is cost-effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €32,263.00 per QALY gained which is slightly over the normal threshold found in other Italian economic studies, which usually considers a 40-year-period. Conversely, the budget impact analysis was conducted over 3?years, and it led to an estimated annual saving of €1.6 million, €4.6 million and €5.5 million in the first, second and third year of apremilast commercialization, respectively, for a total saving of €11.75 million in 3?years.

Limitations: Limitations of this analysis include the absence of head-to-head trials comparing therapies included in the economic model, the lack of comparative long-term data on treatment efficacy, and the assumption of complete independence between the considered response rates to therapy.

Conclusion: The use of apremilast as a first option before the use of biologic agents may represent a cost-effective treatment strategy for patients with PsA who fail to respond to, or are intolerant to, previous DMARD therapy. In addition, based on a budget impact perspective, the use of apremilast may lead to cost savings to the Italian healthcare system.     

Estimated burden of cardiovascular disease and value-based price range for evolocumab in a high-risk,secondary-prevention population in the US payer context

Aim: To estimate real-world cardiovascular disease (CVD) burden and value-based price range of evolocumab for a US-context, high-risk, secondary-prevention population.

Materials and methods: Burden of CVD was assessed using the UK-based Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) in order to capture complete CV burden including CV mortality. Patients on standard of care (SOC; high-intensity statins) in CPRD were selected based on eligibility criteria of FOURIER, a phase 3 CV outcomes trial of evolocumab, and categorized into four cohorts: high-risk prevalent atherosclerotic CVD (ASCVD) cohort (n?=?1448), acute coronary syndrome (ACS) (n?=?602), ischemic stroke (IS) (n?=?151), and heart failure (HF) (n?=?291) incident cohorts. The value-based price range for evolocumab was assessed using a previously published economic model. The model incorporated CPRD CV event rates and considered CV event reduction rate ratios per 1?mmol/L reduction in low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) from a meta-analysis of statin trials by the Cholesterol Treatment Trialists Collaboration (CTTC), i.e. CTTC relationship.

Results: Multiple-event rates of composite CV events (ACS, IS, or coronary revascularization) per 100 patient-years were 12.3 for the high-risk prevalent ASCVD cohort, and 25.7, 13.3, and 23.3, respectively, for incident ACS, IS, and HF cohorts. Approximately one-half (42%) of the high-risk ASCVD patients with a new CV event during follow-up had a subsequent CV event. Combining these real-world event rates and the CTTC relationship in the economic model, the value-based price range (credible interval) under a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000/quality-adjusted life-year gained for evolocumab was $11,990 ($9,341–$14,833) to $16,856 ($12,903–$20,678) in ASCVD patients with baseline LDL-C levels ≥70?mg/dL and ≥100?mg/dL, respectively.

Conclusion: Real-world CVD burden is substantial. Using the observed CVD burden in CPRD and the CTTC relationship, the cost-effectiveness analysis showed that, accounting for uncertainties, the expected value-based price for evolocumab is higher than its current annual cost, as long as the payer discount off list price is greater than 20%.     

Economic evaluation of tocilizumab combination in the treatment of moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis in Italy

Abstract

Objective:

This study was designed to evaluate the cost utility of tocilizumab in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients, with inadequate responses to traditional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (tDMARDs) from a payer’s perspective in Italy.

Methods:

An individual patient simulation model was used to project lifetime medical costs (payer’s perspective) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Treatment sequences starting with tocilizumab or the most commonly prescribed biologics (etanercept, adalimumab, or infliximab) were compared. The addition of tocilizumab to standard of care, without the replacement of anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α treatments, was also evaluated. Patient characteristics, treatment efficacy, and quality-of-life data were based on three phase 3 tocilizumab clinical trials (TOcilizumab Pivotal Trial in Methotrexate Inadequate respONders [OPTION], Tocilizumab in cOmbination With traditional DMARD therapy [TOWARD], and TociLIzumab Safety and THE Prevention of Structural Joint Damage [LITHE]). Mixed-treatment comparison was used to estimate response probabilities. Resource utilization, treatment acquisition, administration, and monitoring costs were estimated using Italian secondary sources. Uncertainty in model parameters was evaluated by probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

Results:

Replacement of anti-TNF-α treatments with tocilizumab reduced total costs over a patient’s lifetime (base-case analysis: tocilizumab sequence, €141,100 vs standard of care sequence, €143,500). Patients receiving tocilizumab realized more QALYs than patients receiving standard of care (9.8881 vs 9.3502 QALYs). Therefore, according to the base-case analysis, the tocilizumab sequence dominated the standard of care. In a sensitivity analysis, the model base-case result was robust to input changes. When tocilizumab was added to standard of care, without replacing anti-TNF-α treatments, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €17,100 per QALY.

Conclusion:

The analysis demonstrates that, in Italy, replacing another biologic DMARD with tocilizumab or adding tocilizumab to the current standard of care is a cost-effective strategy in the treatment of RA patients with inadequate responses to tDMARDs.     

A case-control study of anaemia in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs in an adult population in the US: prevalence and impact on healthcare utilisation

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of anaemia and its impact on healthcare utilisation in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods: Patients with claims for moderate-to-severe RA (ICD-9 code 714.x) treated with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs as well as controls without RA matched for age, gender and time in plan were selected from the MarketScan Research Database. Anaemia was identified by ICD-9 codes 280.x, 285.2x, 281.9, 285.9 and 284.8. The prevalence ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI) for anaemia among RA patients versus controls were estimated. Overall disease burden was measured using the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI).

Results: The prevalence ratio for anaemia in RA patients was 2.2 (95% CI 2.1–2.4). Mean ECI was higher in RA (2.26) compared with control (1.02) patients (p<0.001), and RA patients with anaemia had a higher ECI compared with those without anaemia (3.95 vs. 2.08; p<0.001). Total healthcare costs in RA patients with anaemia were approximately twice those of RA patients without anaemia.

Conclusions: The prevalence of clinically diagnosed anaemia in RA patients in the claims database was 2.2 times higher than that in the comparable non-RA control group. RA patients with anaemia had significantly higher levels of co-morbidity and healthcare costs than RA patients without anaemia.     

Economic burden of chemotherapy-treated recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck in France: real-world data from the permanent sample of national health insurance beneficiaries

Aims: Overall survival (OS) of patients with recurrent or metastatic (R/M) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) is extremely poor. New therapeutic options emerge but need to establish their economic value. The objective was to describe the direct and related costs of R/M SCCHN in France.

Materials and methods: We selected all adult patients treated with chemotherapy for R/M SCCHN between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2014 from the permanent sample of the French national health insurance database (EGB). Data were analyzed from the index date (first chemotherapy) until patients’ death or 31 December 2015. “Treatment period” and “end-of-life” (EoL) (from last chemotherapy until death) were distinguished. Costs included all hospitalizations for SCCHN and ambulatory care. Costs of hospitalized and non-hospitalized adverse events (AEs) were estimated.

Results: Among 267 patients identified, 85% were men, 44% had metastases at the index date and the mean age was 62.0 years (±9.9). The most common tumor location was oropharynx (29%) but 39% of patients had multiple locations. Median OS was 9.3 (95% CI: 7.9–11.8) months for the overall population. The average total direct cost per patient was €49,954, broken down into €32,908 (95% CI: 29,525–36,290) for hospitalizations and €17,047 (14,941–19,152) for ambulatory care. Main cost drivers were drug acquisition and administration (€14,538) during the treatment period (209?days on average) and palliative care (€3,750) during the EoL period (125?days). Regarding related costs, around 12% of patients received disability pensions (€1,397 per patient [624–2,171]) and sick leave payments (€1,592 [888–2,297]). “Metabolism and nutrition disorders” and “Infections and infestations” were the most expensive hospitalized AEs (€1,513 and €1,180 per patient, respectively). Febrile neutropenia was the most expensive non-hospitalized AE (€766 per patient).

Conclusions: This analysis of real-world data confirms the poor prognosis of patients with R/M SCCHN and provides cost data for future economic evaluations.     

Annual patient and caregiver burden of oncology clinic visits for granulocyte-colony stimulating factor therapy in the US

Objective:

Prophylactic treatment with granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSFs) is indicated for chemotherapy patients with a significant risk of febrile neutropenia. This study estimates the annual economic burden on patients and caregivers of clinic visits for prophylactic G-CSF injections in the US.

Methods:

Annual clinic visits for prophylactic G-CSF injections (all cancers) were estimated from national cancer incidence, chemotherapy treatment and G-CSF utilization data, and G-CSF sales and pricing information. Patient travel times, plus time spent in the clinic, were estimated from patient survey responses collected during a large prospective cohort study (the Prospective Study of the Relationship between Chemotherapy Dose Intensity and Mortality in Early-Stage (I–III) Breast Cancer Patients). Economic models were created to estimate travel costs, patient co-pays and the economic value of time spent by patients and caregivers in G-CSF clinic visits.

Results:

Estimated total clinic visits for prophylactic G-CSF injections in the US were 1.713 million for 2015. Mean (SD) travel time per visit was 62 (50) min; mean (SD) time in the clinic was 41 (68) min. Total annual time for travel to and from the clinic, plus time at the clinic, is estimated at 4.9 million hours, with patient and caregiver time valued at $91.8 million ($228 per patient). The estimated cumulative annual travel distance for G-CSF visits is 60.2 million miles, with a total transportation cost of $28.9 million ($72 per patient). Estimated patient co-pays were $61.1 million, ～$36 per visit, $152 per patient. The total yearly economic impact on patients and caregivers is $182 million, ～$450 per patient.

Limitations:

Data to support model parameters were limited. Study estimates are sensitive to the assumptions used.

Conclusions:

The burden of clinic visits for G-CSF therapy is a significant addition to the total economic burden borne by cancer patients and their families.