Healthcare costs among adults with type 2 diabetes initiating saxagliptin or linagliptin: a US-based claims analysis

Objective: To compare healthcare costs of adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) after initiation of saxagliptin or linagliptin, two antidiabetic medications in the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor medication class.

Methods: Patients with T2D who were at least 18 years old and initiated saxagliptin or linagliptin (index date) between 1 June 2011 and 30 June 2014 were identified in the MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Databases. All-cause healthcare costs and diabetes-related costs (T2D diagnosis on a medical claim and/or an antidiabetic medication claim) were measured in the 1 year follow-up period. Saxagliptin and linagliptin initiators were matched using propensity score methods. Cost ratios (CRs) and predicted costs were estimated from generalized linear models and recycled predictions.

Results: There were 34,560 saxagliptin initiators and 18,175 linagliptin initiators identified (mean ages 57 and 59; 55% and 56% male, respectively). Before matching, saxagliptin initiators had significantly lower all-cause total healthcare costs than linagliptin initiators (mean?=?$15,335 [SD $28,923] vs. mean =?$20,069 [SD $48,541], p?p?n?=?16,069 per cohort), saxagliptin initiators had lower all-cause follow-up costs than linagliptin initiators (CR?=?0.953, 95% CI?=?0.932–0.974, p?p?=?0.017; predicted costs?=?$3989 vs. $4159).

Conclusions: Adult patients with T2D initiating treatment with saxagliptin had lower total all-cause healthcare costs and diabetes-related medical costs over 1 year compared with patients initiating treatment with linagliptin.     

Impact of comorbid depression or anxiety on patterns of treatment and economic outcomes among patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain

ABSTRACT

Objective: The objective of this retrospective analysis was to assess the correlation of comorbid depression and/or anxiety to patterns of treatment, healthcare utilization, and associated costs among diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP) patients, employing a large US administrative claims database.

Research design and methods: Patients under age 65 with commercial insurance and patients aged 65 and older with employer-sponsored Medicare supplemental insurance were selected for the study if they had at least one diagnosis of DPNP in 2005. The first observed DPNP claim was considered the ‘index date.’ All individuals had a 12-month pre-index and 12-month follow-up period. For both populations, two subgroups were constructed for individuals with depression and/or anxiety (DPNP-DA cohort) or without these disorders (DPNP-only cohort). Patients’ demographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, and medication use were compared over the pre-index period. Healthcare expenditures and resource utilization were measured for the post-index period. Two-part models were used to examine the impact of comorbid depression and/or anxiety on healthcare utilization and costs, controlling for demographic and clinical characteristics.

Results: The study identified 11?854 DPNP-only and 1512 DPNP-DA patients in the Medicare supplemental cohort, and 11?685 and 2728 in the commercially insured cohort. Compared to DPNP-only patients over the follow-up period, a significantly higher percentage of DPNP-DA patients were dispensed pain and DPNP-related medication. All components of healthcare utilization, except home healthcare visits and physician office visits, were more likely to be provided to DPNP-DA patients versus the DPNP-only cohort (all p?<?0.01). Controlling for differences in demographic and clinical characteristics, DPNP-DA patients had significantly higher total costs than those of DPNP-only patients for Medicare ($9134, p?<?0.01) and commercially insured patients ($11?085, p?<?0.01).

Limitations: Due to the use of a retrospective administrative claims database, limitations of this study include the potential for selection bias between study cohorts, mis-identification of DPNP and/or depression, and inability to assess indirect costs as well as use and cost of over-the-counter medications.

Conclusions: These findings indicate that the healthcare costs were significantly higher for DPNP patients comorbid with depression and/or anxiety relative to those without such disorders.     

Healthcare utilization and direct costs of non-infectious comorbidities in HIV-infected patients in the USA

Objective: To estimate the incremental healthcare utilization and costs associated with common non-infectious comorbid conditions among commercially and Medicaid-insured HIV-infected patients in the US.

Methods: US administrative claims were used to select adult HIV patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), cardiovascular disease (CVD) events, or fracture/osteoporosis, three common comorbidities that have been associated with HIV and HIV treatment, between 1 January 2004 and 30 June 2013. Propensity score matched controls with no CKD, no CVD events, and no fracture/osteoporosis were identified for comparison. All-cause healthcare utilization and costs were reported as per patient per month (PPPM).

Results: The commercial cohort comprised 381 CKD patients, 624 patients with CVD events, and 774 fracture/osteoporosis patients, and 1013, 1710, and 2081 matched controls, respectively; while the Medicaid HIV cohort comprised 207 CKD and 271 CVD cases, and 516 and 735 matched controls, respectively. There was insufficient Medicaid data for fracture analyses. Across both payers, HIV patients with CKD or CVD events had significantly higher healthcare utilization and costs than controls. The average incremental PPPM costs in HIV patients with CKD were $1403 in the commercial cohort and $3051 in the Medicaid cohort. In those with CVD events, the incremental costs were $2655 (commercial) and $4959 (Medicaid) for HIV patients compared to controls (p?Conclusions: The results suggested a considerable increase in healthcare utilization and costs associated with CKD, CVD and fracture/osteoporosis comorbidities among HIV patients in the past decade. Because these conditions have been associated with treatment, it is critical to consider their impact on costs and outcomes when optimizing patient care.     

Cost and utilization of COPD and asthma among insured adults in the US*

ABSTRACT

Objectives: This study evaluates the burden of concomitant chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) + asthma, two highly prevalent and costly conditions.

Patients and methods: The authors identified commercial enrollees from a large health plan database who were aged ≥40 years with medical and pharmacy benefits and medical claims with diagnosis codes for COPD or asthma between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2004. We assigned patients to COPD or COPD + asthma cohorts, excluding all others. A patient index date was the first evidence date of COPD or COPD?+?asthma. We excluded those with one outpatient COPD or asthma claim or who were not continuously enrolled during the 12 months before and after index date. After controlling for differences, postindex respiratory-related emergency department (ED) visits and/or hospitalizations and costs were compared between cohorts.

Results: We identified 24,935 patients, 17,394 (70%) in the COPD cohort and 7,541 (30%) in the COPD?+?asthma cohort. COPD?+?asthma patients were younger (58 versus 60 years; p?<?0.0001) and more were females (62% vs 45%; p?<?0.0001). COPD?+?asthma patients were 1.6 times more likely to have respiratory-related EDs and/or hospitalizations than COPD patients (95% CI 1.5, 1.8), and had $1987 (SE?=?$174, p?<?0.0001) more respiratory-related healthcare costs. Mean adjusted respiratory-related healthcare costs were $3803 for COPD and $5790 for COPD?+?asthma. Limitations include a potential for misclassification due to misdiagnosis or coding errors as well as traditional biases of observational studies including the potential for omitted variable bias.

Conclusion: COPD?+?asthma patients are more costly and use more services than those with COPD, and may be more unstable and require more intensive treatment.     

Will insomnia treatments produce overall cost savings to commercial managed-care plans? A predictive analysis in the United States

ABSTRACT

Objective: Research indicates that insomnia may contribute significantly to healthcare costs; however, information on the effects of treatments on costs has not been thoroughly published. This study presents predictive models that forecast, from the perspective of commercial managed care, the effects of insomnia medications in reducing overall medical costs. The main objectives of this study were to predict the level of cost savings associated with insomnia treatments, illustrate the variation in outcomes given underlying model assumptions, and assist managed-care policy-makers with the evaluation of medications routinely administered for insomnia.

Methods: Data on four primary-efficacy measures: wake after sleep onset (WASO), sleep efficiency (SE), sleep onset latency (SOL) and total sleep time (TST) were abstracted from published clinical trial data for eszopiclone, indiplon, low-dose trazodone, ramelteon, zaleplon, zolpidem and zolpidem extended-release. Change in per-patient per-year (PPPY) healthcare costs in a single claims database was calculated for subjects taking zolpidem, zaleplon and low-dose trazodone using generalized linear model (GLM) techniques, controlling for baseline demographics and baseline costs. Change in costs for emerging insomnia medications was forecasted by imputing efficacy values for these drugs into the regressions.

Results: Using the accepted efficacy measure, WASO, zolpidem extended-release had the overall forecasted savings of –$1253 (CI: –$1404 to –$1404) PPPY compared to remaining treatments, whereas ramelteon cost an additional $348 (–$1280 to $584) PPPY. In three out of four cost-efficacy models, zolpidem extended-release had higher mean forecasted PPPY savings.

Conclusion: This study examined cost effects of existing and emerging insomnia medications using models integrating clinical literature and medical claims within a statistical framework. The use of a single database may limit generalizability and models only address a 1?year period. Results suggest treatments can offer health plans direct cost savings, with amounts sensitive to variable and efficacy measures, potentially limited by those variables available in the claims database. Compared to other evaluated treatments, zolpidem extended-release produced consistently higher predicted cost savings.     

Protein-energy wasting significantly increases healthcare utilization and costs among patients with chronic kidney disease: a propensity-score matched cohort study

Background: Disease-related malnutrition is highly prevalent, and has prognostic implications for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD); however, few studies have investigated the impact of malnutrition, or protein-energy wasting (PEW), on healthcare utilization and medical expenditure among CKD patients.

Methods: Using claim data from the National Health Insurance in Taiwan, this study identified patients with CKD between 2009–2013 and categorized them into those with mild, moderate, or severe CKD. Cases with PEW after CKD was diagnosed were propensity-score matched with controls in a 1:4 ratio. Healthcare resource utilization metrics were compared, including outpatient and emergency department visits, frequency and duration of hospitalization, and the cumulative costs associated with different CKD severity.

Results: From among 347,501 CKD patients, eligible cohorts of 66,872 with mild CKD (49.2%), 27,122 with moderate CKD (19.9%), and 42,013 with severe CKD (30.9%) were selected. Malnourished CKD patients had significantly higher rates of hospitalization (p?p?=?.015 for mild CKD, p?=?.002 for severe CKD) than non-malnourished controls. Cumulative medical costs for outpatient and emergency visits, and hospitalization, were significantly higher among all malnourished CKD patients than non-malnourished ones (p?p?Conclusions: In a nationally-representative cohort, CKD patients with PEW had significantly more healthcare resource utilization and higher aggregate medical costs than those without, across the spectrum of CKD: preventing PEW in CKD patients should receive high priority if we would like to reduce medical costs.     

Costs of needlestick injuries and subsequent hepatitis and HIV infection

ABSTRACT

Background: Physicians, nurses and other healthcare workers (HCWs) are at risk of bloodborne pathogens infection from needlestick injuries, but costs of needlesticks are little studied.

Methods: We used the cost-of-illness and incidence approaches. We used the perspective of the medical provider (medical costs) and the individual (lost product­ivity). Data on needlesticks, infections from hepatitis B and C (HBV, HCV) and human immune-deficiency (HIV) among HCWs, as well as data on per-unit costs were culled from research literature, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports, and Bureau of Labor Statistics reports. We also generated estimates based upon industry employment and scenarios for source-patients. These data and estimates were combined with assumptions to produce a model that generated base-case estimates as well as one-way and multi-way probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Future costs were discounted by 3%.

Results: We estimated 644?963 needlesticks in the healthcare industry for 2004 of which 49% generated costs. Medical costs were $107.3 million of which 96% resulted from testing and prophylaxis and 4% from treating long-term infections (34 persons with chronic HBV, 143 with chronic HCV, and 1 with HIV). Lost-work productivity generated $81.2 million, for which 59% involved testing and prophylaxis and 41% involved long-term infections. Combined medical and work productivity costs summed to $188.5 million. Multi-way sensitivity analysis suggested a range on combined costs from $100.7 million to $405.9 million.

Conclusion: Detailed methodology was developed to estimate costs of needlesticks and subsequent infections for hospital-based and non-hospital-based health care workers. The combined medical and lost productivity costs comprised roughly 0.1% of all occupational injury and illness costs for all jobs in the economy. We did not account for lost home production or pain and suffering costs, however, nor did we estimate benefit/cost ratios of specific interventions to reduce needlesticks.     

Warfarin time in therapeutic range and its impact on healthcare resource utilization and costs among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation

Background:

Warfarin is efficacious for reducing stroke risk among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). However, the efficacy and safety of warfarin are influenced by its time in therapeutic range (TTR).

Objective:

To assess differences in healthcare resource utilization and costs among NVAF patients with low (<60%) and high (≥60%) warfarin TTRs in an integrated delivery network (IDN) setting.

Methods:

Patients with NVAF were identified from an electronic medical record database. Patients were required to have ≥6 international normalized prothrombin time ratio (INR) tests. NVAF patients were grouped into two cohorts: those with warfarin TTR <60% (low TTR) and those with warfarin TTR ≥60% (high TTR). Healthcare resource utilization and costs were evaluated during a 12 month follow-up period. Multivariable regressions were used to assess the impact of different warfarin TTRs on healthcare costs.

Results:

Among the study population, greater than half (54%, n?=?1595) had a low TTR, and 46% (n?=?1356) had a high TTR. Total all-cause healthcare resource utilization was higher among patients in the low TTR cohort vs. the high TTR cohort (number of encounters: 70.2 vs. 56.1, p?<?0.001). After adjusting for patient characteristics, total all-cause healthcare costs and stroke-related healthcare costs were $2398 (p?<?0.001) and $687 (p?=?0.02) higher, respectively, for patients in the low TTR cohort vs. the high TTR cohort.

Limitations:

In this retrospective study, we were only able to evaluate the association and not the causality between healthcare resource utilization and costs with the different warfarin TTRs.

Conclusion:

Many warfarin-treated NVAF patients have a low warfarin TTR. NVAF patients with low vs. patients with high warfarin TTR used healthcare resources to a greater extent, which was reflected in higher healthcare costs.     

Cost implications of IV versus oral anti-angiogenesis therapies in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma: retrospective claims database analysis*

ABSTRACT

Objective: Angiogenesis inhibitors (AI) are promising novel treatments for patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, IV therapy may impose infection risk from IV catheters, and will include increased costs due to administration and transportation costs. This study evaluated the incremental costs associated with IV administration of selected AI therapies (bevacizumab off-label) compared to oral therapies (sunitinib or sorafenib) for the treatment of RCC.

Methods: Patients with ≥2 RCC claims (ICD-9: 189.0, 198.0) were identified from a US commercial health insurance claims database from 1/2004 to 12/2007. Patients receiving bevacizumab (n?=?109) were matched 1:1 to patients receiving sorafenib or sunitinib, and observed from their first AI therapy claim until the last treatment date. AI, inpatient, outpatient and pharmacy costs were calculated on a per-patient per-month (PPPM) basis over the treatment period. Costs were compared between the IV AI group and each separate oral AI group using multivariate Tobit regressions for each category separately, adjusting for demographic and baseline clinical characteristics. This study assessed costs of treatment and did not evaluate the cost-effectiveness of AIs.

Results: Mean total medical costs were $13?351, $6998, and $8213 PPPM for bevacizumab, sorafenib, and sunitinib, respectively (p?<0.05 for equality). Adjusted incremental total cost for the bevacizumab group was $4951 PPPM compared to sorafenib and $4610 PPPM compared to sunitinib (both p?<?0.05). Bevacizumab patients incurred incremental PPPM outpatient services cost compared to sorafenib and sunitinib of $2772 and $2548, respectively (both p?<?0.05).

Conclusions: Assuming median progression-free survival of 8.5 months as shown for bevacizumab (Bukowski, et al., J Clin Oncol 2007), the incremental costs would be estimated at $39?188–42?080 per patient compared to those treated with sunitinib or sorafenib. Assuming similar efficacies, oral AI therapies may result in cost savings to patients and healthcare payers over IV therapies.     

Prevalence and economic burden of hyperkalemia in the United States Medicare population

Abstract

Objective: To estimate the prevalence and economic burden of hyperkalemia in the United States (US) Medicare population.

Methods: Patients were selected from a 5% random sample of Medicare beneficiaries (01 January 2010–31 December 2014) to estimate the prevalence and economic burden of hyperkalemia. The prevalence for each calendar year was calculated as the number of patients with hyperkalemia divided by the total number of eligible patients per year. To estimate the economic burden of hyperkalemia, patients with hyperkalemia (cases) were matched 1:1 to patients without hyperkalemia (controls) on age group, chronic kidney disease [CKD] stage, dialysis treatment, and heart failure. The incremental 30-day and 1-year resource utilization and costs (2016 USD) associated with hyperkalemia were estimated.

Results: The estimated prevalence of hyperkalemia was 2.6–2.7% in the overall population and 8.9–9.3% among patients with CKD and/or heart failure. Patients with hyperkalemia had higher 1-year rates of inpatient admissions (1.28 vs. 0.44), outpatient visits (30.48 vs. 23.88), emergency department visits (2.01 vs. 1.17), and skilled nursing facility admissions (0.36 vs. 0.11) than the matched controls (all p?<?.001). Patients with hyperkalemia incurred on average $7208 higher 30-day costs ($8894 vs. $1685) and $19,348 higher 1-year costs ($34,362 vs. $15,013) than controls (both p?<?.001). Among patients with CKD and/or heart failure, the 30-day and 1-year total cost differences between cohorts were $7726 ($9906 vs. $2180) and $21,577 ($41,416 vs. $19,839), respectively (both p?<?.001).

Conclusions: Hyperkalemia had an estimated prevalence of 2.6–2.7% in the Medicare population and was associated with markedly high healthcare costs.