Hospitalization risks in the treatment of bipolar disorder: comparison of antipsychotic medications

Direct medical cost of bipolar disorder: Insights from the FACE-BD longitudinal cohort

BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder (BD) is a severe chronic psychiatric disorder affecting 0.5 to 1% of the population worldwide. To date, most studies have estimated the cost of BD via information sourced from insurance claims with limited information on clinical characteristics and course of BD. The aims of this study are (i) to estimate the direct healthcare cost associated with BD and to identify contributing factors and (ii) to study the evolution of cost during a two-year follow-up period.

METHOD

We analyzed a sample of 1116 individuals with BD included in the Advanced Centers of Expertise in Bipolar Disorder cohort. We estimated the direct healthcare cost per year and per patient, and we identified the clinical features of patients with BD associated with higher direct healthcare costs. In a subsample of patients followed up for two years centers of expertise for BD, we studied the evolution of direct healthcare cost.

RESULTS

The average cost of bipolar disorder was € 6910 per year and per patient. Clinical features of BD, sociodemographic characteristics, and associated addiction were associated with higher direct healthcare costs. In the subsample of patients followed-up for two years, direct healthcare cost dropped by more than 50%, strongly suggesting the beneficial effect of specialized care organization.

LIMITATION

We did not estimate indirect healthcare and intangible costs.

CONCLUSION

Our study investigates the cost of BD and its evolution in a deeply phenotyped longitudinal sample. Cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses are required to inform resource allocation decisions and to promote innovative healthcare organizations.

Predictors of 1-year rehospitalization in inpatients with bipolar I disorder treated with atypical antipsychotics

Bipolar disorder (BPD) is debilitating disorder, and patients can experience multiple relapses and subsequent hospitalizations. Since pharmacotherapy is the mainstay of treatment for patients with BPD, investigations on the effects of atypical antipsychotics (AAP) on reducing rehospitalization risk are crucial. The objective of study is to explore predictors of 1-year rehospitalization in patients with bipolar I disorder treated with AAP. A retrospective chart review on inpatients with bipolar I disorder was conducted. All participants were followed up for 1 year, and they were subdivided into three AAP treatment groups (olanzapine, risperidone, and quetiapine group). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was implemented to detect time to rehospitalization due to any mood episodes within 1 year after discharge. Cox proportional regression model was adopted to find predictors of 1-year hospitalization in patients who experienced rehospitalization. One hundred thirty-eight participants were included in the study, and a 1-year rehospitalization rate was 18.1%. Time to rehospitalization did not differ between three AAP treatment groups. Predictors of rehospitalization due to any episode within 1 year were family history of depression and number of previous admission. Our findings can be conducive to understanding prognosis, and predicting rehospitalization risk in patients with BPD on AAP.

Combination Regimen With Lithium and Antipsychotic in Bipolar Manic Episodes: Impact on Adult Hospitalization Length of Stay

Objective

To discern the demographic predictors in bipolar disorder (BD) manic patients receiving combination regimen, that is, lithium and antipsychotic, and to study the impact of a combination regimen on hospitalization length of stay (LOS) and total charges.

Methods

We used the nationwide inpatient sample (NIS) and included 1,435 adult inpatients with BD, manic episodes, and receiving lithium. Independent sample T-test with equality measures was used for LOS and total charges. Logistic regression model was used to find the odds ratio (OR) for the combination regimen to estimate the predictors with 95% CI.

Results

Among the inpatient sample, 34.5% received a combination regimen. There was statistically no significant difference between the combination regimen versus non-combination regimen cohorts by age and sex. A higher proportion of inpatients receiving combination regimen were from high-income families above 75th percentile (56.4%) and covered by private insurance (47.5%). Blacks (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.43-2.82) and hispanic (OR 2.31, 95% CI 1.49-3.57) had higher odds of receiving a combination regimen compared to whites. The combination regimen significantly reduced LOS for BD, manic episode management by 2.8 days (95% CI 1.13-4.53 days, P < 0.001). There was statistically no significant mean difference in total charges (P = 0.495).

Conclusion

A combination regimen with lithium and antipsychotics significantly reduced LOS for BD manic episodes by 2.8 days compared to inpatients receiving lithium monotherapy. So, starting the combination regimen from the initial day of hospitalization should be considered as an effective model for faster response.

Correlates of current rapid-cycling bipolar disorder: Results from the Italian multicentric RENDiBi study

BACKGROUND

we aimed to compare socio-demographic and clinical differences between patients with versus without current RC in order to detect clinical factors that may favor early diagnosis and personalized treatment.

METHODS

A total of 1675 patients (males: n = 714 and females: n = 961; bipolar 1: n = 1042 and bipolar 2: n = 633) from different psychiatric clinics were grouped and compared according to the current presence of RC in terms of socio-demographic and clinical variables. Chi-squared tests for qualitative variables and Student's t tests for quantitative variables were executed for group comparison, and multivariable logistic regressions were performed, considering the current presence of RC as dependent variable, and socio-demographic/clinical factors as independent variables.

RESULTS

Female gender (male versus female: OR = 0.64, p = 0.04), unidentifiable prevalent polarity (versus depressive polarity: OR = 1.76, p = 0.02; versus manic polarity: OR: 2.86, p < 0.01) and hospitalization in the last year (no versus yes: OR = 0.63, p = 0.02) were found to be associated with RC in the final multivariable regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

RC in BD seems to be more prevalent in female gender and associated with some unfavorable clinical features, such as an increased risk of hospitalization. These aspects should be taken into account in the management and monitoring of RC versus non-RC patients.

Hospitalization risk in bipolar disorder patients treated with lurasidone versus other atypical antipsychotics

OBJECTIVE

This observational study compared the risk of hospitalization for patients with bipolar disorder when treated with lurasidone versus other oral atypical antipsychotics.

METHODS

This US commercial claims analysis (4 April 2010 through 24 September 2014) used the Optum Research Database to identify adult patients with bipolar disorder treated with oral atypical antipsychotics (N = 11,132). The first claim for an atypical antipsychotic defined the index date, with pre-index and post-index periods of 180 and 360 days, respectively. Every month of the post-index period was categorized as monotherapy treatment with lurasidone, aripiprazole, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, ziprasidone, no/minimal treatment or other. Starting with the initial month of treatment, the risk of psychiatric or all-cause hospitalization in the subsequent month was examined based on treatment in the current month and pre-index covariates (age, gender, hospitalizations, emergency room visits, diagnoses for anxiety, alcohol abuse, substance abuse, hypertension, type 2 diabetes and obesity) and time-varying versions of the pre-index covariates using a marginal structural model.

RESULTS

After controlling for covariates, relative to lurasidone, the odds of psychiatric and all-cause hospitalization, respectively, were 2-3 times higher for olanzapine (odds ratio [OR] = 2.78, CI 1.09, 7.08, p = .032; OR = 3.20, CI 1.24, 8.26, p = .016), quetiapine (OR = 2.80, CI 1.13, 6.95, p = .026; OR = 3.23, CI 1.29, 8.11, p = .013), risperidone (OR = 2.50, CI 1.01, 6.21, p = .048; OR = 2.79, CI 1.11, 7.02, p = .029), aripiprazole (OR = 2.13, CI 0.87, 5.20, p = .097; OR = 2.57, CI 1.04, 6.37, p = .041) and ziprasidone (OR =2.31, CI 0.91, 5.85, p = .079; OR = 2.49, CI 0.97, 6.40, p = .058).

CONCLUSIONS

In this claims database analysis, lurasidone-treated patients with bipolar disorder had a significantly lower risk of psychiatric hospitalization compared to quetiapine, olanzapine and risperidone, but not aripiprazole or ziprasidone. Lurasidone-treated patients had a significantly lower risk of all-cause hospitalization compared to quetiapine, olanzapine, risperidone and aripiprazole, but not ziprasidone.

Correlates of psychiatric hospitalization in a clinical sample of Canadian adolescents with bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVE

To identify factors associated with psychiatric hospitalization among adolescents with bipolar disorder (BD).

METHODS

Participants were 100 adolescents, ages 13-19, who fulfilled DSM-IV criteria for bipolar I disorder [(BD-I), n=26], bipolar II disorder [(BD-II), n=40], or operationalized criteria for BD not otherwise specified [(BD-NOS), n=34], via the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia, Present and Lifetime version (KSADS-PL). Demographic, clinical, and family history variables were measured via clinical interview with the participant and a parent or guardian.

RESULTS

The lifetime prevalence of psychiatric hospitalization was 50%. Significant predictors of psychiatric hospitalization in univariate analyses included older age, BD-I, history of suicide attempt, psychosis, lifetime use of second generation antipsychotics (SGAs), lithium, SSRI antidepressants and any medication. BD-II was negatively associated with psychiatric hospitalization. In multivariable analyses, older age, history of suicide attempt, psychosis and use of SGAs were positively associated with hospitalization, whereas BD-II was negatively associated with hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychiatric hospitalization in adolescents with BD is highly prevalent and associated with older age and proxies for greater illness severity. Further studies are needed to identify strategies for reducing the need for psychiatric hospitalizations among adolescents with BD.

Impact of extended-release quetiapine fumarate on hospitalization length and cost in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder patients: a retrospective, hospital-based, US-cohort analysis

AIM

The aim was to evaluate the impact of quetiapine extended release (XR) on hospitalization length and cost in schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, versus quetiapine immediate release (IR), using Premier Perspective™ inpatient hospital database data.

METHODS

Inpatient discharges classified within diagnosis-related group 430 (psychoses), prescribed quetiapine XR or IR, were identified. Patients had International Classification of Disease-9 diagnosis of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. The impact of the XR formulation on hospitalization length and costs was assessed using generalized linear model analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 30,429 discharges between 1 January 2008 and 30 June 2009 were analyzed. Patients who received quetiapine XR had significantly reduced hospitalization length (10.73% estimated reduction; p = 0.001) and cost (9.52% estimated reduction; p < 0.001), versus IR. This corresponds to a 1.0-day reduction in hospitalization (10.73% of 9.2 days) and US$532 reduction in hospitalization cost (9.52% of US$5588) per patient, based on least squares mean estimations. Evaluation of patient subpopulations suggested the reduction in length of hospitalization for quetiapine XR versus IR was driven mainly by patients with bipolar disorder, whereas cost reduction was driven mainly by patients with schizophrenia.

CONCLUSION

Inpatient use of quetiapine XR in schizophrenia or bipolar disorder is associated with reduced hospitalization length and cost, possibly due to the faster titration schedule versus quetiapine IR.

Impact of once-daily extended-release quetiapine fumarate on hospitalization length in patients with acute bipolar mania

AIMS

Evaluate the impact of quetiapine extended release (XR) versus quetiapine immediate release (IR) on hospitalization length in acute bipolar mania using Truven Health Analytics MarketScan Hospital Drug Database.

PATIENTS & METHODS

Generalized linear model analyses were used, adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics.

RESULTS

Using data from 3088 discharges, quetiapine XR reduced hospitalization length by 6.7% versus quetiapine IR (p = 0.11; no statistically significant differences between groups), corresponding to 0.6 fewer days in hospital. Excluding the outlier, quetiapine XR significantly reduced hospitalization length by 9.6% versus quetiapine IR (p = 0.02), corresponding to 0.9 days.

CONCLUSION

Inpatient use of quetiapine XR in acute bipolar mania may be associated with reduced hospitalization length (7-10%), possibly owing to the faster titration schedule versus quetiapine IR.

Treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization and costs in patients with bipolar disorder, newly treated with extended release or immediate release quetiapine fumarate using US healthcare administrative claims data

BACKGROUND

Differences in treatment patterns, health care resource use, and costs are expected among patients newly treated with quetiapine extended release (XR) or quetiapine immediate release (IR).

OBJECTIVE

To compare treatment patterns, health care resource use, and costs in patients with bipolar disorder newly treated with quetiapine XR or quetiapine IR.

METHODS

This was an observational, retrospective cohort study that used HealthCore Integrated Research Database-identified patients (age range, 18-64 years) with an International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision diagnosis of bipolar disorder and ≥1 pharmacy claim for quetiapine XR or quetiapine IR between October 2, 2008, and July 31, 2010. Outcomes were as follows: patient characteristics at the index date (first claim for quetiapine XR or quetiapine IR); 12-month preindex clinical characteristics, health care resource use, and costs; and 12-month postindex treatment patterns, health care resource use, and costs, assessed using generalized linear models (adjusted for index date and preindex patient demographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, health care resource use, and costs).

RESULTS

In total, 3049 patients with bipolar disorder were analyzed (651 in the quetiapine XR group and 2398 in the quetiapine IR group). Of patients initiating treatment with quetiapine XR, 8.8% had no change in or discontinuation of their index therapy compared with 5.7% of patients treated with quetiapine IR (adjusted odds ratio, 1.44; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-2.00; P = 0.0317). The average daily dose (adjusted mean) of quetiapine XR was higher than quetiapine IR (225 vs 175 mg/d, P < 0.0001). An average daily dose of 300 to 800 mg was reached sooner (15.6 vs 30.8 days, P = 0.0049) and in more patients (44.2% vs 27.2%, P < 0.0001) who were taking quetiapine XR compared with patients taking quetiapine IR. No differences in total health care costs were found between the cohorts; however, patients taking quetiapine XR were less likely to be hospitalized for mental health-related reasons (12.1% vs 18.3%, P = 0.0022) and incurred lower mental health-related costs (US $6686 vs US $7577, P = 0.0063) compared with patients taking quetiapine IR.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment patterns and dosing differ in patients with bipolar disorder treated with quetiapine XR compared with those treated with quetiapine IR. Mental health-related hospitalizations and costs may be reduced in the 12 months after patients initiating treatment with quetiapine XR compared with initiating treatment with quetiapine IR.

Quetiapine: a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in bipolar disorder

This article briefly summarizes the burden of bipolar disorder and the clinical profile of quetiapine (Seroquel®) in the management of bipolar disorder, followed by a detailed review of pharmacoeconomic analyses. Quetiapine is an atypical antipsychotic that is available in numerous countries as immediate-release and extended-release tablets for the treatment of major psychiatric disorders, including bipolar disorder. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials with quetiapine have demonstrated its efficacy in bipolar I and II disorders, and the drug has been generally well tolerated in clinical trials. Three cost-effectiveness analyses of maintenance therapy in bipolar I disorder, which used similar Markov models and incorporated data from key clinical trials and a number of other sources, showed that quetiapine, as adjunctive therapy with mood stabilizers (lithium or divalproex), was a cost-effective treatment option from the healthcare payer perspective in the UK and the US. Quetiapine either dominated comparators (typically mood stabilizers alone) or was associated with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios that were usually well below widely accepted thresholds of cost effectiveness. One of the studies evaluated extended-release quetiapine, although clinical efficacy data used in the Markov model were for the immediate-release formulation. In another analysis, which used a discrete-event simulation model and was conducted from the perspective of the UK healthcare payer, quetiapine monotherapy was cost effective compared with olanzapine monotherapy as maintenance treatment for all phases of bipolar I or II disorder. In this model, favourable results were also shown for quetiapine (with or without mood stabilizers) compared with a wide range of maintenance therapy regimens. Another modelled analysis conducted from the UK healthcare payer perspective showed that quetiapine was dominated by haloperidol in the short-term treatment of a manic episode in patients with bipolar I disorder. Both favourable and unfavourable results have been reported in cost analyses of quetiapine in bipolar disorder (type I or type not specified). Possible explanations for some of the variability in results of the pharmacoeconomic analyses include heterogeneity among the models in terms of input parameters or assumptions in the base-case analyses, country- or region-specific differences in estimates of healthcare resource use and associated costs, variability in treatment alternatives, and differences in the year of costing and discounting used in the analyses. In addition, some of the studies had short time horizons and focused on acute manic episodes only, whereas others were longer-term analyses that considered the full spectrum of health states in patients with bipolar disorder. Various limitations of the studies have been recognized, and results from one country may not be applicable to other countries. In conclusion, results of available pharmacoeconomic analyses provide evidence of the cost effectiveness of quetiapine as an adjunct to mood stabilizers for maintenance therapy in (primarily type I) bipolar disorder from a healthcare payer perspective in the UK and the US. Some evidence is available to support the cost effectiveness of quetiapine monotherapy or the use of extended-release quetiapine as adjunctive therapy with mood stabilizers in this setting, although further analyses appear to be warranted. Whether these findings apply to other geographical regions requires further study. Evidence for the long-term (>2-year) cost effectiveness of quetiapine in bipolar disorder is currently limited and further studies are also needed to address the cost effectiveness of quetiapine from a societal perspective and in bipolar II disorder.

Dose trends for second-generation antipsychotic treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotic dosing used in clinical practice can differ from dosing originally recommended in product labeling. This has been reported for olanzapine and quetiapine, where higher doses are commonly used. This may be the case for ziprasidone as well.

METHOD

To characterize changes over time in dosing for the initial and subsequent prescriptions of first-line second-generation antipsychotics used during treatment episodes for outpatients with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, the 2001-2005 Thomson MarketScan Medicaid Database (Medicaid) and the 2001-2006 MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database (Commercial) were analyzed. Dose trends were evaluated using autoregressive time-series models.

RESULTS

Data were available for 49180 treatment episodes of schizophrenia (4683 Commercial and 44497 Medicaid) and 83289 treatment episodes of bipolar disorder (57961 Commercial and 25328 Medicaid). The initial prescription mean daily and overall mean daily doses of ziprasidone in schizophrenia episodes significantly increased across the Medicaid and Commercial populations, with similar trends observed for bipolar episodes. The first (May 2001) and last (December 2005) observed 3-month mean daily doses for ziprasidone were 112 mg/d and 138 mg/d for patients with schizophrenia and 93 mg/d and 113 mg/d for those with bipolar disorder in the Medicaid cohort, with similar findings for the Commercial cohort. Consistently significant trends in dose changes were not observed for the other medications, although quetiapine and olanzapine doses generally increased while aripiprazole and risperidone doses generally decreased.

CONCLUSIONS

There remains a need for controlled randomized clinical trials that test fixed doses of antipsychotics to ascertain the dose-response relationship within the dose range used in contemporary clinical practice.