The impact of generic drugs on the cost of transplantation medical care

Topics in transplantation medicine for general nephrologists

Before transplantation, the general nephrologist is the primary resource for potential kidney transplantation recipients. After transplantation, the general nephrologist is increasingly managing transplant medications and complications. We provide evidence-based management strategies for common clinical issues. Linking our approach with the data allows the clinician to explore each subject in greater depth to tailor care to individual patients.

Healthcare costs in renal transplant recipients using branded versus generic ciclosporin

BACKGROUND

Generic ciclosporin A modified (CsA) does not have an equivalent pharmacokinetic profile to branded CsA in some transplant populations, potentially leading to negative clinical consequences and increased long-term costs.

OBJECTIVE

To assess direct healthcare costs for de novo renal transplant recipients in the US receiving branded versus generic CsA in the first month after transplantation.

METHODS

Administrative claims data from eight private US health plans were linked to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network data. A total of 227 renal transplant cases between 1996 and 2004 were included: 183 were dispensed branded CsA and 44 received generic CsA. Log transformed multiple linear regression was used to model total first-year healthcare costs after the initial CsA claim, controlling for both patient demographics and clinical characteristics and clustering at the transplant centre level.

RESULTS

After controlling for patient factors and pre-CsA costs, total healthcare costs were significantly higher (p = 0.04) for patients receiving generic CsA versus branded CsA. The main driver for the difference was the cost associated with immunosuppressants other than CsA (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Despite initial perceived cost savings associated with generic CsA, de novo renal transplant recipients incurred greater total healthcare costs than those treated with branded CsA. Patients receiving generic CsA may need higher doses or other immunosuppressants to maintain the transplanted kidney than patients receiving branded CsA. Providers and payers need to be aware of potential differences in total healthcare costs between formulations of bioequivalent critical-dose drugs to make the best choice for patient care.

Neoral-to-Gengraf conversion in renal transplant recipients

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and need for dosage adjustments when patients taking the Neoral formulation of cyclosporine are converted to the generic formulation, Gengraf.

METHODS

From September 2001 through January 2002, patients receiving follow-up care in the renal transplant clinic at the VA Tennessee Valley Healthcare System were converted from Neoral to Gengraf based on a 1:1 dosing equivalency. Steady-state cyclosporine trough concentrations were obtained both prior to and following Neoral-to-Gengraf conversions. Patients were also monitored for changes in serum creatinine, hospitalization, cyclosporine toxicity, graft rejection, and need for further adjustment in cyclosporine regimen.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients were included in data analysis. There were no differences in cyclosporine concentrations (P =.0853) or serum creatinine (P =.4469) following conversion to Gengraf. There were no reports of cyclosporine toxicity, no episodes of graft rejection, and no need for further dose adjustment related to the generic conversion.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoral and Gengraf are therapeutically equivalent cyclosporine formulations, such that renal transplant recipients maintained on Neoral can be safely and effectively converted to the Gengraf formulation based on a 1:1 conversion ratio. The use of Gengraf over Neoral within the Veterans Affairs Healthcare System offers a reduced cost alternative but maintains equal efficacy and outcomes.

Pharmacoeconomics of therapeutic drug monitoring in transplantation

Immunosuppressive drugs have contributed significantly to the success of organ transplantation. Therapeutic drug monitoring is an integral part of transplant protocols. However, there is little information concerning its positive contribution to pharmacoeconomics. Before developing studies to demonstrate the potential benefits of TDM, consideration must be given to the type of TDM to be evaluated. It is argued that, given that the lymphocyte in the central compartment is the target for immunosuppressants, Area-Under-the-Curve monitoring may be a better reflection of control and toxicity than traditional trough monitoring.