Dataset Information

Healthcare Resource Use in Patients with Immune-Mediated Conditions Treated with Targeted Immunomodulators During COVID-19 Pandemic: A Retrospective Claims Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on routine medical care may result in altered healthcare resource use in patients with immune-mediated conditions. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of treatment interruptions in patients with and without COVID-19 infections who were treated with targeted immunomodulators (TIMs) in the USA.

Methods

Data from the IBM^® MarketScan^® Research Databases were analyzed in patients with immune-mediated conditions from January 1, 2018, through December 31, 2020. Healthcare resource use (HCRU) including hospitalizations, emergency department (ED) visits, in-person outpatient visits, and respiratory outcomes was assessed in a cohort of patients without COVID-19 who had uninterrupted versus interrupted TIM use. The impact of treatment interruption on HCRU and respiratory outcomes was also evaluated in a cohort of patients with COVID-19. Results from adjusted logistic regression were reported as adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals.

Results

Approximately 25% of patients in both the COVID-19 (N = 787) and non-COVID-19 cohorts (N = 77,178) experienced interruptions in TIM therapy. In the non-COVID-19 cohort, the likelihood of being hospitalized was 20% less in patients with uninterrupted versus interrupted TIM use (aOR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.71-0.90). Patients with uninterrupted TIM use had a similar likelihood of an ED visit (aOR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.91-1.08) and respiratory outcome (aOR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.71-1.31) versus patients with interrupted TIM use. The likelihood of having an in-person outpatient visit was 87% greater in patients with uninterrupted versus interrupted TIM use (aOR = 1.87, 95% CI 1.81-1.94). Similar findings were observed in the COVID-19 cohort.

Conclusion

This analysis of real-world claims data showed that uninterrupted TIM use was not associated with an increased likelihood of hospitalizations, ED visits, or negative respiratory outcomes compared to interrupted TIM use among patients with immune-mediated conditions, regardless of COVID-19 diagnosis.

SUBMITTER: Bergman M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8436009 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThe aim of this study was to compare healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) before and after initiation of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) in the long-term care (LTC) setting (rehabilitation center, mental health center, LTC non-skilled nursing facility/assisted-living facility, home health, assisted living, nursing home, other/unknown).MethodsThis retrospective analysis used IQVIA's New Data Warehouse, which includes deterministically linked LTC, prescription, and professional fee claims data and IQVIA Hospital Charge Data Master database. The study period was 1 April 2013 to 31 December 2019. The index date was the date of ESL initiation in the LTC setting. Inclusion criteria were: (1) ≥ 1 new ESL prescription between 1 April 2014 and 31 December 2018; (2) diagnosis of focal seizure (FS) during the 12 months pre-index date; and (3) no ESL prescription during the 12-month period pre-index. A 12-month pre-post analysis compared epilepsy-specific and all-cause HCRU before and after ESL initiation. Categorical variables were compared with McNemar's tests.ResultsA total of 307 patients (mean age 52.2 years, 57.7% male) with FS were included, of whom 24.8% were in nursing homes. Patients used a mean of 3.1 antiseizure drugs prior to initiation of ESL, and 87.9% of patients initiated ESL as adjunctive treatment. There were significant reductions in proportion of patients with epilepsy specific physician office visits, emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalizations, and all-cause physician office visits and hospitalizations in the post-index period compared to the pre-index period (P < 0.05). Similar results were observed in sensitivity (patients with an epilepsy diagnosis) and subgroup analyses [presence or absence of intellectual developmental disorders or age (≥ 65 and < 65 years)].ConclusionProportion of patients with epilepsy-specific physician office visits, ED visits, hospitalizations, and all-cause physician office visits and hospitalizations were significantly reduced following initiation of ESL in patients with FS in LTC.

Project description:ObjectiveThis study aimed to analyze the healthcare resource use (HCRU) and associated costs of multiple myeloma (MM) using German claims data.MethodsAnonymized claims data from one of the largest sickness funds in Germany were analyzed. Costs and HCRU were calculated from the perspective of the statutory health insurance. To analyze MM-associated incremental costs in a most recent calendar period for an overall MM population (31 March 2018-31 March 2019), a prevalent cohort of MM patients (continuously insured during 01 January 2010 until 31 March 2019 or death; two or more outpatient and/or one inpatient MM diagnoses [ICD-10: C90.0-] and alive on 31 March 2018) was compared with a control group (not diagnosed with MM) employing propensity-score matching. Additionally, to describe MM-associated HCRU and costs for treated patients per line of treatment (lot), a cohort of newly treated patients was considered (≥ 12 months' pre-index period without MM treatment). Therapy lines were determined based on observed days of medication supply, treatment switches, and treatment discontinuations.ResultsOverall, 2523 prevalent MM patients (52.0% female, mean age: 71.3 years) and 1673 newly treated MM patients (50.2% female, mean age: 73.0 years) met the selection criteria and were included in the analyses. After matching, a non-MM counterpart could be identified for 2474 prevalent out of 2523 MM patients. MM-associated incremental HCRU was characterized by an increased number of hospitalizations and a higher number of outpatient specialist visits (per patient-year [ppy] 0.48 additional hospitalizations and 3.80 additional specialist visits; p < 0.001), being also drivers of the associated total incremental add-on costs (15,381.09 € ppy, p < 0.001). Among newly treated patients, total direct costs ppy increased as patients received subsequent treatments (1st lot: 67,681,55 €; 4th lot+: 114,934.01 €), driven by outpatient MM prescriptions (1st lot: 28,692.32 €; 4th lot+: 62,980.72 €).ConclusionThe economic burden of MM is driven by outpatient prescriptions, inpatient hospitalizations, and outpatient specialist visits. Treatment and overall costs increase substantially when patients move to later lines of treatment.

Project description:IntroductionEnzalutamide and abiraterone acetate (plus prednisone) are new hormonal treatments for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). This study compared treatment duration, healthcare resource utilization (HRU), and treatment costs for chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC patients treated with enzalutamide or abiraterone acetate in the USA.MethodsChemotherapy-naïve mCRPC patients initiating treatment with enzalutamide or abiraterone acetate were identified from administrative claims. Continuous enrollment ≥ 6 months before and ≥ 3 months after the index date (initiation date of enzalutamide or abiraterone acetate) was required. Treatment duration, all-cause and prostate cancer-related HRU, and costs were estimated during the post-index period. Multivariable analyses compared HRU and costs between cohorts, adjusting for baseline characteristics.ResultsOverall, 920 chemotherapy-naïve patients initiated enzalutamide and 2310 initiated abiraterone acetate (median follow-up, 10.7 and 13.5 months, respectively). More enzalutamide-treated patients had corticosteroid-sensitive comorbidities at baseline. Treatment duration was longer with enzalutamide versus abiraterone acetate (median, 10.7 vs. 8.8 months; P = 0.008). Enzalutamide was associated with fewer all-cause inpatient admissions [adjusted incidence rate ratio (95% confidence interval) 0.87 (0.76, 0.99)], days of hospitalization [0.84 (0.70, 1.02)], and outpatient visits [0.94 (0.90, 0.98)], and fewer prostate cancer-related outpatient visits [0.92 (0.87, 0.96)] compared with abiraterone acetate. Enzalutamide was also associated with lower prostate cancer-related inpatient and emergency department costs [adjusted differences, $122 (P = 0.024) and $28 (P = 0.009), respectively].ConclusionChemotherapy-naïve mCRPC patients treated with enzalutamide versus abiraterone acetate had longer treatment duration and incurred lower HRU and prostate cancer-related inpatient and emergency department costs.FundingAstellas Pharma Inc.

Project description:BackgroundPirfenidone and nintedanib are antifibrotic therapies which slow disease progression in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), an irreversible, progressive lung disease with poor prognosis. We compared adherence, persistence, and healthcare costs between patients initiating one of the two therapies.MethodsWe used the IBM Watson Health Commercial and Medicare Supplemental claims databases to select patients with IPF with ≥1 pharmacy claim for pirfenidone or nintedanib between 10/1/2014 and 6/30/2018. Adherence (proportion of days covered ≥0.80) and persistence (time to a gap of ≥60 days without medication or switch to the other antifibrotic medication) based on the days' supply and service date fields on claims were measured over a variable-length follow-up period. Healthcare costs, all-cause and respiratory-related, were measured over the persistent period and a fixed 12-month follow-up period. Inverse probability of treatment weights were applied to models comparing adherence, persistence, and costs between the two cohorts.ResultsOverall, 799 pirfenidone patients and 656 nintedanib patients were identified. Similar proportions of patients were adherent in both cohorts (pirfenidone = 49% vs. nintedanib = 51%) and there was no significant difference in the odds of being adherent after weighting (odds ratio = 1.1, p = 0.513). The proportions of patients who discontinued/switched were also similar (pirfenidone = 41% vs. nintedanib 43%); however, in a weighted model, the hazards of discontinuation/switching was lower for the pirfenidone cohort (hazard ratio = 0.8, p = 0.032). While patients were persistent on therapy, weighted all-cause healthcare costs were comparable (pirfenidone = $11,272 vs. nintedanib = $11,987 per-patient per-month; p = 0.115), but weighted respiratory-related costs were significantly lower for the pirfenidone cohort ($9015 vs. $10,167 per-patient per-month, p < 0.001). Weighted annual total all-cause and respiratory-related healthcare costs were comparable between cohorts over the fixed 12-month follow-up period, but the pirfenidone cohort had significantly lower weighted annual mean antifibrotic drug costs than the nintedanib cohort ($68,850 vs. $77,033, p = 0.007).ConclusionsPirfenidone use was associated with longer time to discontinuation/switch, lower antifibrotic drug costs, and lower respiratory-related total costs compared to nintedanib use.

Project description:BackgroundWe compared real-world healthcare resource utilization (HRU), Crohn's disease (CD)-related complications, and time to systemic corticosteroid discontinuation between patients with CD treated with adalimumab versus vedolizumab as initial biologic.MethodsBiologic-naïve adults with CD and ≥2 claims between 05/20/2014 and 09/30/2019 for adalimumab or vedolizumab were identified in the IBM MarketScan research database. Patient characteristics were assessed during the 6-month baseline period before biologic initiation (index date). Adalimumab- and vedolizumab-treated patients were propensity score-matched 1:1 on demographics, disease characteristics, and comorbidities with ≥10% prevalence that differed significantly between groups. Categorical, continuous, and time-to-event outcomes between groups during the 12-month follow-up on/after index were compared with chi-square tests, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, and Kaplan-Meier analyses, respectively.ResultsAdalimumab- and vedolizumab-treated patients were matched (n = 461 per group) and baseline characteristics balanced. Significantly fewer adalimumab- versus vedolizumab-treated patients had a CD-related emergency room visit (12-month proportion: 14.5% vs 21.0%; log-rank P < 0.01) or inpatient admission (14.9% vs 20.2%; log-rank P < 0.05). Rates of CD-related surgeries were similar (9.3% vs 11.5%; log-rank P = 0.282). Among patients without internal/perianal abscess or fistula or intestinal stricture at baseline (N ADA = 360, N VDZ = 364), numerically but not significantly fewer adalimumab- versus vedolizumab-treated patients had CD-related complications at 12 months (18.3% vs 22.3%; P = 0.171). Among patients with corticosteroid use at index (N ADA = 143, N VDZ = 139), significantly more adalimumab- versus vedolizumab-treated patients discontinued corticosteroids (12-month proportion: 90.2% vs 76.3%; log-rank P < 0.001).ConclusionsPatients with CD treated with adalimumab as their first biologic experienced significantly lower CD-related HRU and were more likely to discontinue corticosteroids compared to vedolizumab-treated patients.

Project description:IntroductionCystic fibrosis (CF) is a life-limiting genetic disease caused by mutations in the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) gene. Elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor (ELX/TEZ/IVA) is a CFTR modulator (CFTRm) that targets the underlying cause of CF. Based on safety and efficacy demonstrated in clinical trials, ELX/TEZ/IVA is approved in the US for the treatment of CF in people aged ≥ 2 years who have ≥ 1 F508del-CFTR mutation or a CFTR mutation that is responsive to ELX/TEZ/IVA based on in vitro data. While ELX/TEZ/IVA demonstrated unprecedented improvements in lung function and dramatic reductions in pulmonary exacerbations (PEx) and associated hospitalizations in clinical trials, a limited number of studies have examined the impact of ELX/TEZ/IVA on healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and associated costs in a real-world setting. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate changes in PEx, HCRU, and associated non-CFTRm healthcare costs following initiation of ELX/TEZ/IVA among people with CF aged ≥ 12 years in the US.MethodsWe evaluated the rates of PEx, HCRU, and associated costs before and after initiation of ELX/TEZ/IVA in people with CF aged ≥ 12 years using data from the Merative MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters Database and the Merative Multi-State Medicaid Database from April 21, 2019 to December 31, 2020. Because the study period included time following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, we limited our primary analysis to the period prior to the pandemic (October 21, 2019 to March 12, 2020). Outcomes following the onset of the pandemic (March 13 to December 31, 2020) were examined in an exploratory analysis.ResultsIn both commercially insured and Medicaid-insured people with CF, ELX/TEZ/IVA was associated with reductions in PEx, hospitalizations, and associated costs prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, and these reductions were maintained following the onset of the pandemic.ConclusionsThese findings suggest that ELX/TEZ/IVA reduces the burden and costs associated with PEx and hospitalizations in people with CF.

Project description:IntroductionErenumab is indicated for migraine preventive treatment in adults. The objective of this study was to provide descriptive information on real-world use of erenumab including patient profile and treatment patterns.MethodsWe completed a retrospective review of US data (through May 2019) from the IBM MarketScan® Early View Databases, identifying adult patients newly treated with erenumab with a migraine claim in the year prior to first erenumab claim (index) and at least 1 year of continuous pre-index medical and pharmacy insurance coverage, to assess pre- and post-erenumab migraine characteristics, comorbidities, healthcare resource utilization, and associated costs. All data were summarized using descriptive statistics.ResultsA total of 9753 patients met inclusion criteria. The average (SD) age was 46 (12) years, 85% of patients were female, and 64% had at least one claim for chronic migraine; 70% of erenumab users had an initial dose of 70 mg; 77% of patients in the 6-month follow-up sample (n = 4437) remained on their initial erenumab dose. Persistence at 6-month follow-up was 47.3% with a mean (95% CI) proportion of days covered of 0.68 (0.67, 0.68). In the post-erenumab period, claims for comorbidities of non-migraine headaches and anxiety were reduced and there was a shift to decreased use of acute and preventive medications. Reductions in overall use and associated cost of healthcare resources such as inpatient hospitalization and outpatient office visits were minimal, with slightly more pronounced reductions in the subgroup of patients that were persistent to erenumab.ConclusionsWe observed reductions in claims for important migraine characteristics, comorbidities, and a shift to decreased use of acute and preventive migraine medications-observations indicative of the real-world effectiveness of erenumab. Further examination is required as persistence to erenumab, which may be influenced by dose titration, appears to be an important factor in changes to healthcare resource utilization and costs.