Treatment discontinuation of long-acting injectables or oral atypical antipsychotics among Medicaid recipients with schizophrenia

Abstract

Aims: Among patients with schizophrenia, poor adherence and persistence with oral atypical antipsychotics (OAA) often results in relapse and hospitalization. Second-generation antipsychotic long-acting injectables (SGA LAI) have demonstrated higher adherence than first-generation antipsychotic LAI and OAA therapies. This study aimed to determine whether SGA LAIs are associated with better persistency compared to OAA among Medicaid recipients with schizophrenia.

Materials and methods: From the MarketScan Medicaid Database (January 1, 2010–June 30, 2016), patients aged ≥18?years with schizophrenia and ≥2 pharmacy claims more than 90?days apart for the same SGA LAI or OAA were selected. New users of the specific antipsychotic agent were classified, based on their index agent, as: OAA, paliperidone palmitate LAI (PPLAI), aripiprazole LAI (ALAI), and risperidone LAI (RLAI). Discontinuation during 1 year of follow-up was defined as a?≥?60-day gap in the index OAA or SGA LAI medication past the exhaustion of the previous claim’s supply. Inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTW) balanced the cohort characteristics, and weight outliers (<0.1 or >0.9) were excluded. IPTW-weighted Cox proportional hazards regression estimated hazard ratios for discontinuation.

Results: Cohorts included 7,029 OAA, 4,302 PPLAI, 586 ALAI, and 1,456 RLAI patients. Mean age was 38.0–41.0?years and 44.0–46.6% were female. Persistence was significantly longer in the SGA LAI cohorts than in the OAA cohort. Adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for discontinuation were 0.60 (0.56–0.64) for PPLAI, 0.69 (0.60–0.79) for ALAI, and 0.70 (0.64–0.77) for RLAI vs OAA.

Limitations: Results may not be generalizable to patients covered by commercial or Medicare insurance, and limitations inherent to any claims-based retrospective analysis apply.

Conclusions: SGA LAI may be a valuable option for treating schizophrenia given the improvement in persistence.     

A comparison of treatment patterns,healthcare resource utilization,and costs among young adult Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia treated with paliperidone palmitate or oral atypical antipsychotics in the US

Abstract

Background: Much of the burden associated with schizophrenia is attributed to its early onset and chronic nature. Treatment with once monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP1M) is associated with lower healthcare utilization and better adherence as compared to oral atypical antipsychotics (OAAs). This study aimed to evaluate real-world effectiveness of PP1M and OAA therapies among US-based adult Medicaid patients with schizophrenia, overall and among young adults aged 18–35 years.

Methods: Adult patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia and at least two claims for PP1M or OAA between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2014 were selected from the IBM Watson Health MarketScan Medicaid Database. Treatment patterns and healthcare resource utilization and costs were compared between PP1M and OAA treatment groups following inverse probability of treatment (IPT) weighting to adjust for potential differences. Utilization and cost outcomes were estimated using OLS and weighted Poisson regression models.

Results: After IPT weighting, the young adult PP1M and OAA cohorts were comprised of 3,095 and 3,155 patients, respectively. PP1M patients had a higher duration of continuous treatment exposure (168.2 vs 132.5 days, p?=?.004) and better adherence on the index medication (proportion of days covered ≥80%: 19.0% vs 17.1%, p?<?.049). Young adults treated with PP1M were 37% less likely to have an all-cause inpatient admission (odds ratio [OR]?=?0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI]?=?0.53–0.74) and 33% less likely to have an ER visit (OR?=?0.67, 95% CI?=?0.55–0.81) compared to OAA young adult patients, but 27% more likely to have an all-cause outpatient office visit (OR?=?1.27, 95% CI?=?1.02–1.56). PP1M patients incurred significantly lower medical costs as compared to OAA patients.

Conclusions: Medicaid patients with schizophrenia treated with PP1M have higher medication adherence and have fewer hospitalizations as compared to patients treated with OAAs. PP1M may lead to reduced healthcare utilization and improved clinical outcomes.     

Cost effectiveness analysis of a next generation risk assessment score for cardiovascular disease

Objectives:

The goal of this study is to determine the cost-effectiveness of MIRISK VP, a next generation coronary heart disease risk assessment score, in correctly reclassifying and appropriately treating asymptomatic, intermediate risk patients.

Study design:

A Markov model was employed with simulated subjects based on the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). This study evaluated three treatment strategies: (i) practice at MESA enrollment, (ii) current guidelines, and (iii) MIRISK VP in MESA.

Methods:

The model assessed patient healthcare costs and outcomes, expressed in terms of life years and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), over the lifetime of the cohort from the provider and payer perspective. A total of 50,000 hypothetical individuals were used in the model. A sensitivity analysis was conducted (based on the various input parameters) for the entire cohort and also for individuals aged 65 and older.

Results:

Guiding treatment with MIRISK VP leads to the highest net monetary benefits when compared to the ‘Practice at MESA Enrollment’ or to the ‘Current Guidelines’ strategies. MIRISK VP resulted in a lower mortality rate from any CHD event and a modest increase in QALY of 0.12–0.17 years compared to the other two approaches.

Limitations:

This study has limitations of not comparing performance against strategies other than the FRS, the results are simulated as with all models, the model does not incorporate indirect healthcare costs, and the impact of patient or physician behaviors on outcomes were not taken into account.

Conclusions:

MIRISK VP has the potential to improve patient outcomes compared to the alternative strategies. It is marginally more costly than both the ‘Practice at MESA Enrollment’ and the ‘Current Guidelines’ strategies, but it provides increased effectiveness, which leads to positive net monetary benefits over either strategy.     

Within trial cost-utility analysis of disease management program for patients hospitalized with atrial fibrillation: results from the SAFETY trial

Abstract

Background: The potential impact of disease management to optimize quality of care, health outcomes, and total healthcare costs across a range of cardiac disease states is unknown.

Methods: A trial-based cost-utility analysis was conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial of 335 patients with chronic, non-valvular AF (without heart failure; the SAFETY Trial) discharged to home from three tertiary referral hospitals in Australia. A home-based disease management intervention (the SAFETY intervention) that involved community-based AF care including home visits was compared to routine primary healthcare and hospital outpatient follow-up (standard management). Bootstrapped incremental cost-utility ratios were computed based on quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and total healthcare costs. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were constructed to explore the probability of the SAFETY intervention being cost-effective. Sub-group analyses were performed based on age and sex to determine differential cost-effectiveness.

Results: During median follow-up of 1.75?years, the SAFETY intervention was associated with a non-statistically significant increase in QALYs (0.02 per person) and lower total healthcare costs (–$4,375 per person). Although each of these findings were not statistically significant, the SAFETY intervention was found to be dominant (more effective and cost saving) in 58.8% of the bootstrapped iterations and cost-effective (more effective and gains in QALYs achieved at or below $50,000 per QALY gained) in 61.5% of the iterations. Males and those aged less than 78?years achieved greater gains in QALYs and savings in healthcare costs. The estimated value of perfect information in Australia (the monetized value of removing uncertainty in the cost-effectiveness results) was A$51 million, thus demonstrating the high potential gain from further research.

Conclusions: Compared with standard management, the SAFETY intervention is potentially a dominant strategy for those with chronic, non-valvular AF. However, there would be substantial value in reducing the uncertainty in these estimates from further research.

Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry identifier: ACTRN12610000221055.     

Cost-effectiveness analysis of peginterferon beta-1a compared with interferon beta-1a and glatiramer acetate in the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in the United States

Objective Peginterferon beta-1a 125?mcg, administered subcutaneously (SC) every 2 weeks, a new disease-modifying therapy (DMT) for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2014. This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of peginterferon beta-1a vs interferon beta-1a (44?mcg SC 3 times per week) and glatiramer acetate (20?mg SC once-daily) in the treatment of RRMS from the perspective of a US payer over 10 years.

Methods A Markov cohort economic model was developed for this analysis. The model predicts disability progression, occurrence of relapses and other adverse events and translates them into quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs. Natural history data were obtained from the placebo arm of the ADVANCE trial of peginterferon beta-1a, the London Ontario (Canada) database and a large population-based MS survey. Comparative efficacy of each DMT vs placebo was obtained from a network meta-analysis. Costs (in 2014?US dollars) were sourced from public databases and literature. Clinical and economic outcomes were discounted at 3% per year.

Results Over 10 years, peginterferon beta-1a was dominant (i.e., more effective and less costly), with cost-savings of $22,070 and additional 0.06 QALYs when compared with interferon beta-1a 44?mcg and with cost-savings of $19,163 and 0.07 QALYs gained when compared with glatiramer acetate 20?mg. Results were most sensitive to variations in the treatment effect of each DMT, treatment acquisition costs of each DMT and the time horizon. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicated that peginterferon beta-1a remains dominant in >90% of 5,000 replications compared with either DMTs.

Conclusion This analysis suggests that long-term treatment with peginterferon beta-1a improves clinical outcomes at reduced costs compared with interferon beta-1a 44?mcg and glatiramer acetate 20?mg and should be a valuable addition to managed care formularies for treating patients with RRMS.     

Cost analysis of the treatments for patients with advanced Parkinson's disease: SCOPE study

Abstract

Objective:

To perform a comparative long-term analysis of the associated healthcare costs for the therapeutic options in advanced Parkinson’s Disease (PD): deep brain stimulation (DBS), continuous duodenal levodopa-carbidopa infusion (CDLCI), and continuous subcutaneous apomorphine infusion (CSAI).     

美国出台新的核废物处置战略

2013年1月,美国能源部发布《乏燃料及高放废物管理的处置战略》。通过对新出台的核废物处置战略的系统设计和组织实施的要素及面临的挑战进行分析,得出如下结论：该战略力图解决高放废物的处置这一世界性课题,并提出了三步走目标,其实施的关键在于同意制选址机制的确立和运行、相关资金机制的改革、建立专门的新的核废物管理和处置机构、以及美国国会给予新的立法授权等。此外,公众的理解和支持也至关重要。美国处置核废物战略对我国开展核废物处置及相关选址工作有一定启迪。     

Insulin degludec versus insulin glargine U100 for patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes in the US: a budget impact analysis with rebate tables

Background and aims: Drug rebates are almost universally negotiated privately between the manufacturer and the payer in the US. The aim of the present study was to illustrate the use of a “rebate table” to improve the transparency and utility of published budget impact analyses in the US by modeling ranges of hypothetical rebates for two comparators. Worked examples were conducted to illustrate the budgetary implications of using insulin degludec (IDeg) relative to insulin glargine (IGlar) U100 in patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes.

Methods: A short-term (1-year) budget impact model was developed to evaluate the costs of switching to IDeg from IGlar in patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes on basal-bolus and basal-only insulin, respectively. The analysis used insulin dose and hypoglycemia data from recent randomized trials, data on the prevalence of diabetes, and estimates of the proportion of patients using each insulin regimen. The model was configured to run multiple rebate scenarios to generate a rebate table in a hypothetical 1 million member commercial plan.

Results: Relative to IGlar, IDeg resulted in reductions in non-severe and severe hypoglycemia incidence and costs both in patients with type 1 and patients with type 2 diabetes. Insulin acquisition costs were higher, and respective rebates of 7.3% and 10.6% were required for IDeg to break-even with IGlar at the full list price. Incremental per member per month IDeg costs without a rebate were USD 0.04 in type 1 diabetes and USD 0.80 in type 2 diabetes.

Conclusions: Using IDeg instead of IGlar at list price could result in a modest increase in costs when considering insulin and hypoglycemia costs alone, but modest incremental rebates with IDeg would result in cost neutrality relative to IGlar. In addition, IDeg would result in reduced incidence of severe and non-severe hypoglycemia.     

Exploring the variability of patient costs in disease management programs: a hierarchical modelling approach

Disease management programs include a wide variation of patients with different chronic diseases and different health care utilization. The aim of this article was to identify factors on patient-level and organizational-level that explain the variability in costs of patients with different chronic diseases enrolled in a DMP by employing a rigorous analytical model. A generalized linear mixed model (GLMM) was specified to perform a multi-level analysis of cross-sectional hierarchical data from 16 DMPs in the Netherlands. Multiple imputation, sub-group analysis per disease and analysis from both the health care and the societal perspectives were also performed. Our model showed that age, the presence of cardiovascular disease, multi-morbidity and payments on top of the payment for the usual care had positive relation with costs, while better quality of life was associated with lower health care costs. In the COPD sample, physical activity and employment were associated with health care costs. Our study showed that there is great variability in health care costs among patients included in DMPs and identified patient and organizational explanatory factors. The findings are relevant to the design of future DMPs and their payment schemes.     

Pharmacoeconomic analysis of the treatment of schizophrenia with quetiapine,olanzapine, risperidone or haloperidol in Spain

Summary

The study objective was to compare the costs of the treatment of schizophrenia with quetiapine (QUE), olanzapine (OLA), risperidone (RIS) or haloperidol (HAL) and those of the secondary effects (SE) associated. A cost-effectiveness analysis, using a Markov process, was used.The time horizon was 12 months.The study population comprised Spanish adult schizophrenic patients.The NHS perspective was taken (direct costs).The costs of several SE of medication were analysed. Use of resources and costs were calculated following the recommendations of the Spanish Psychiatric Society and other sources.

The monthly rates of the onset of SE with each medicine were calculated using a meta-analysis and systematic review of the literature.

A simple univariate sensitivity analysis was performed. QUE is as efficacious as OLA and RIS, but apparently leading to fewer cases of extrapyramidal syndrome and sexual dysfunction, with lower costs. QUE is better tolerated than HAL, but with higher costs.     

Long-term cost-consequence analysis of exenatide once weekly vs sitagliptin or pioglitazone for the treatment of type 2 diabetes patients in the United States

Abstract

Objective:

Exenatide once-weekly (ExQW) is a GLP-1 receptor agonist shown to lower glucose and cardiovascular risk factors in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The objective of this study was to estimate the clinical benefits and associated economic benefits of treatment with ExQW compared with sitagliptin or pioglitazone in the US.

Methods:

The IMS CORE Diabetes Model, a validated computer simulation model, was used to project lifetime clinical outcomes and complication costs. The costs of glucose-lowering drugs were excluded as not all prices were available. Baseline patient characteristics (mean values: age, 52.5 years; diabetes duration, 6 years; HbA1_c, 8.51%; body mass index, 32.12?kg/m²) and clinical data were derived from a phase 3 clinical trial that compared ExQW with sitagliptin or pioglitazone in T2DM patients. At 6 months, patients treated with ExQW had greater improvements in HbA1_c and body weight than those treated with sitagliptin or pioglitazone. Complication costs were extracted from published sources. Health outcomes and costs were discounted at 3% per year. Sensitivity analyses were performed.

Results:

Over 35 years, and compared with sitagliptin or pioglitazone, ExQW increased life expectancy by, respectively, 0.28 (13.76?±?0.17 vs 13.48?±?0.18) and 0.17 years (13.76?±?0.17 vs 13.59?±?0.17), and quality-adjusted life years by, respectively, 0.28 (9.56?±?0.12 vs 9.28?±?0.12) and 0.24 years (9.56?±?0.12 vs 9.32?±?0.12). ExQW was associated with lower lifetime complication costs: compared with sitagliptin or pioglitazone, ExQW saved, respectively US$2215 (US$55,647?±?2039 vs US$57,862?±?2159) and US$933 (US$55,647?±?2039 vs US$56,580?±?2007) direct cost per patient. Cost-savings resulted mainly from a lower projected cumulative incidence of cardiovascular diseases and neuropathic complications.

Limitations:

Short-term changes in surrogate end-points were used to project lifetime effects on clinical outcomes. Pharmacy costs were excluded from the analyses.

Conclusions:

Over a patient’s lifetime, ExQW was projected to improve health and decrease diabetes-related complication costs compared with sitagliptin or pioglitazone.     

Cost of illness associated with Niemann-Pick disease type C in the UK

Abstract

Objective: Niemann-Pick disease type C (NP-C) is a rare and devastating genetic disorder characterised by a range of progressive neurological symptoms, which imposes a burden on patients, family members, the healthcare system and society overall. The objective of this study was to assess direct and indirect costs associated with NP-C in the UK.

Methods: This was a non-interventional, retrospective, cross-sectional cohort study based on responses from patients and/or their carers/guardians recruited from a UK NP-C database. Resource use and direct medical, direct non-medical and indirect costs were evaluated using data collected via postal survey in October 2007, which included a Medical Resource Use questionnaire. Total annual costs per patient were estimated.

Results: In total, 18 Medical Resource Use questionnaires (29% response rate) were received and analysed. The mean total annual cost (SD) of NP-C per patient was £39,168 (£50,315); 46% were direct medical costs, to which home visits and residential care contributed 68% and 15%, respectively. Direct non-medical costs accounted for 24% of the average annual cost per patient, mainly due to specialist education, and indirect costs 30%. If only direct medical costs were considered, the mean annual cost (SD) per patient was reduced to £18,012 (£46,536).

Conclusions: The direct annual per-patient cost of NP-C illness in 2007 appears moderate when compared with other rare and severely disabling diseases. However, cost estimates may be conservative, since findings are limited by a small sample size, low survey response rate and potential recall bias. As demonstrated by this study, a substantial proportion of the cost is shifted from the healthcare system to the patient, family and non-medical providers. These findings highlight the need for treatments that can slow or stop disease progression in NP-C.     

Oral semaglutide versus injectable glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists: a cost of control analysis

Abstract

Aims: The efficacy and safety of oral semaglutide, the first glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist developed for oral administration for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, was evaluated in the PIONEER clinical trial program, and a recently published network meta-analysis allowed comparison with further injectable GLP-1 receptor agonists. The present study aimed to assess the short-term cost- effectiveness of oral semaglutide 14?mg versus subcutaneous once-weekly dulaglutide 1.5?mg, once-weekly exenatide 2?mg, twice-daily exenatide 10?µg, once-daily liraglutide 1.8?mg, once-daily lixisenatide 20?µg, and once-weekly semaglutide 1?mg, in terms of the cost per patient achieving glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) targets (cost of control).

Materials and methods: Cost of control was calculated by dividing the annual treatment costs associated with an intervention by the proportion of patients achieving the treatment target with an intervention, with outcomes calculated for targets of HbA1c ≤6.5% and HbA1c <7.0% for all included GLP-1 receptor agonists. Annual treatment costs were accounted in 2019 United States dollars (USD), based on 2019 wholesale acquisition cost.

Results: For the treatment target of HbA1c ≤6.5%, once-weekly semaglutide 1?mg and oral semaglutide 14?mg were associated with the lowest costs of control, at USD 15,430 and USD 17,383 per patient achieving target, respectively. Similarly, the cost of control was lowest with once-weekly semaglutide 1?mg at USD 12,627 per patient achieving target, followed by oral semaglutide 14?mg at USD 13,493 per patient achieving target for the target of HbA1c <7.0%. All other interventions were associated with higher cost of control values for both targets.

Conclusions: Oral semaglutide 14?mg is likely to be cost-effective versus dulaglutide, exenatide (once weekly and twice daily), liraglutide, and lixisenatide in terms of bringing people with type 2 diabetes to glycemic control targets of HbA1c ≤6.5% and HbA1c <7.0% in the US.