Dataset Information

Disease Burden and Costs in Moderate-to-Severe Chronic Osteoarthritis Pain Refractory to Standard of Care: Ancillary Analysis of the OPIOIDS Real-World Study.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

To determine the disease burden and costs in moderate-to-severe chronic osteoarthritis (OA) pain refractory to standard-of-care treatment in the Spanish National Health System (NHS).

Methods

Ancillary analysis of the OPIOIDS real-world, non-interventional, retrospective, 4-year longitudinal study including patients aged at least 18 years with moderate-to-severe chronic OA pain refractory to standard-of-care with sequential NSAIDs plus opioids. Burden assessment included measurement of analgesia, cognitive functioning, basic activities of daily living, severity and frequency of comorbidities, and all-cause mortality. Costs accounted for healthcare resource utilization and related costs (year 2018).

Results

Records of 13,317 patients were analyzed; 68.9 (14.7) years old, 71.3% (70.5-72.1%) women, 58.1% refractory to NSAID plus weak opioid and 41.9% to NSAID plus strong opioid, accounting for 10.7% (10.5-10.8%) of patients with chronic OA pain. Mean number of comorbidities was 2.9 (1.8) and its severity was 1.8 (1.7). Pain decreased by 0.9 points (12.2%) and cognitive declined by 2.3 points (9.1%, with 4.3% more patients with cognitive deficit) and dependency worsened by 0.4 points (0.5%, with 2.3% more patients with severe-to-total dependence) over a mean treatment period of 188.6 (185.4-191.8) days on NSAIDs followed by 400.6 (393.7-407.5) days on opioids. The adjusted mortality rate was higher in patients with OA taking NSAID plus strong opioids; hazard ratio 1.44 (1.26-1.65; p < 0.001). The 4-year healthcare cost was €7350/patient (€7193-7507 or €1838/year) and was higher in those taking strong versus weak opioids; €9886 (€9608-10,164, €2472/year) vs. €5519 (€5349-5689, €1380/year), p < 0.001. Analgesia cost (16.0% of total cost, 70.2% opioids) was higher with strong versus weak opioids, 19.6% vs. 11.3%, p < 0.001.

Conclusions

In routine clinical practice in Spain, patients with moderate-to-severe chronic OA pain refractory to standard analgesic treatment with NSAIDs plus opioids reported modest reductions in pain, while presenting a considerable burden of comorbidities, cognitive impairment, and dependency. Healthcare costs significantly increased for the NHS particularly with NSAIDs plus strong opioids.

SUBMITTER: Sicras-Mainar A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7991059 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Hyperkalemia (HK) can affect health outcomes and quality of life, as it is referred to as a potentially life-threatening condition caused by an increased serum potassium concentration in the blood. Patients suffering from heart failure or chronic kidney diseases are at a higher risk of HK, which can further be amplified by the treatment received. To date, data on HK prevalence is lacking for Germany and the aims of this study were to assess HK and compare health-relevant outcomes and healthcare costs between HK patients and non-HK patients. METHODS:The InGef research database containing healthcare claims of over 4 million individuals in Germany was utilized for this retrospective, matched cohort analysis. Patients with non-acute outpatient treated and a subgroup of patients with chronic HK, were identified in 2015 with an individual 1 year pre- and post-index period, taking the first observable HK diagnosis/treatment in 2015 into account as the index event. To identify non-acute outpatient treated HK patients, at least two ICD-10-GM diagnosis codes E87.5 "Hyperkalemia" and/or prescriptions of polystyrene sulfonate were required. Chronic HK patients had additional diagnoses and/or prescriptions in all quarters following the first observable HK diagnosis. Patients without HK were matched 1:1 to the respective HK cohorts. RESULTS:In the year 2015, 3333 patients with non-acute outpatient treated HK were identified of which 1693 were patients with chronic HK. After matching, 3191 and 1664 HK patients and controls were available for analysis. A significantly higher number of hospitalizations was observed for both HK cohorts in comparison to their matched controls. Dialysis initiation as well as the healthcare costs were higher for both HK cohorts when compared to their matched counterparts. CONCLUSIONS:The disease burden was higher for patients with HK, based on a higher proportion of patients with dialysis initiation and higher healthcare costs.

Project description:BackgroundUrothelial carcinoma (UC) is generally diagnosed early and may incur significant lifetime costs. This study estimated, from the payer's perspective, the lifetime costs among patients diagnosed with UC according to stage at diagnosis.MethodsThis retrospective analysis of the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database identified patients ≥66 years with newly diagnosed UC from 2004-2013. Patients were followed from UC diagnosis to death or last follow-up to estimate lifetime costs. Costs were allocated to 3 phases: diagnosis (≤3 months after diagnosis), terminal (≤3 months before death), and continuation (months between diagnosis and terminal phases). Survival-adjusted lifetime costs (total and major UC-related) were estimated for patients with UC based on stage at diagnosis (stages 0 through IV) and in a subgroup of patients receiving ≥1 systemic line of chemotherapy (LOC).ResultsThe sample included 15,588 patients: 3,446 stage 0 (8% ≥1 LOC; median [IQR] follow-up in months: 44 [23-71]); 3,902 stage I (12% ≥1 LOC; 33 [15-62]); 4,301 stage II (26% ≥1 LOC; 17 [7-39]); 1,612 stage III (25% ≥1 LOC; 17 [7-42]); and 2,327 stage IV (33% ≥1 LOC; 8 [3-18]). Median age was 78 years and 72% were male. Mean lifetime costs were lowest for stage IV patients (stage 0, $151,626; stage 1, $150,123; stage II, $149,728; stage III, $190,996; stage IV, $117,503). Hospitalizations not involving a cystectomy contributed about half of lifetime costs across all stages. Cystectomy contributed 2-13% of the total lifetime UC costs ($3,356 stage 0; $7,011 stage I; $11,855 stage II; $25,509 stage III; $11,693 stage IV). UC-related office visits contributed 8-15% of lifetime costs ($11,717 stage 0; $14,611 stage I; $19,882 stage II; $21,480 stage III; $17,820 stage IV).ConclusionUC continues to be a costly cancer with stage III patients having highest lifetime costs. Hospitalizations drive most of the lifetime costs across all stages; most of these hospitalizations did not involve costs related to cystectomy. Treatment plans requiring shorter and fewer hospitalizations may lessen the economic burden of UC.

Project description:BackgroundProstate cancer is the most common cancer in men and second leading cause of cancer-related deaths. Changes in screening guidelines, adoption of active surveillance (AS), and implementation of high-cost technologies have changed treatment costs. Traditional cost-effectiveness studies rely on clinical trial protocols unlikely to capture actual practice behavior, and existing studies use data predating new technologies. Real-world evidence reflecting these changes is lacking.ObjectiveTo assess real-world costs of first-line prostate cancer management.Design setting and participantsWe used clinical electronic health records for 2008-2018 linked with the California Cancer Registry and the Medicare Fee Schedule to assess costs over 24 or 60 mo following diagnosis. We identified surgery or radiation treatments with structured methods, while we used both structured data and natural language processing to identify AS.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisOur results are risk-stratified calculated cost per day (CCPD) for first-line management, which are independent of treatment duration. We used the Kruskal-Wallis test to compare unadjusted CCPD while analysis of covariance log-linear models adjusted estimates for age and Charlson comorbidity.Results and limitationsIn 3433 patients, surgery (54.6%) was more common than radiation (22.3%) or AS (23.0%). Two years following diagnosis, AS ($2.97/d) was cheaper than surgery ($5.67/d) or radiation ($9.34/d) in favorable disease, while surgery ($7.17/d) was cheaper than radiation ($16.34/d) for unfavorable disease. At 5 yr, AS ($2.71/d) remained slightly cheaper than surgery ($2.87/d) and radiation ($4.36/d) in favorable disease, while for unfavorable disease surgery ($4.15/d) remained cheaper than radiation ($10.32/d). Study limitations include information derived from a single healthcare system and costs based on benchmark Medicare estimates rather than actual payment exchanges.Patient summaryActive surveillance was cheaper than surgery (-47.6%) and radiation (-68.2%) at 2 yr for favorable-risk disease, which decreased by 5 yr (-5.6% and -37.8%, respectively). Surgery was less costly than radiation for unfavorable risk for both intervals (-56.1% and -59.8%, respectively).