Treatment patterns and costs for anti-TNFα biologic therapy in patients with psoriatic arthritis

Improvements in Patient-Reported Outcomes After Treatment With Deucravacitinib in Patients With Psoriatic Arthritis: Results From a Randomized Phase 2 Trial

OBJECTIVE

Deucravacitinib, a tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitor, was assessed in a phase 2 trial in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Here, we report effects of deucravacitinib from the patient perspective.

METHODS

This phase 2, double-blind trial (NCT03881059) randomized patients with active PsA 1:1:1 to deucravacitinib 6 mg once daily (QD), 12 mg QD, or placebo, for 16 weeks. Key secondary end points were changes from baseline (CFBs) at week 16 in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) and 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) physical component summary (PCS) scores. Additional patient-reported outcomes (PROs) assessed disease impact, including fatigue, pain, and mental health. The mean CFBs in PROs and percentages of patients reporting improvements with minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) or scores of greater than normal values were also assessed.

RESULTS

This study comprised 203 patients (51.2% female; mean ± SD age, 49.8 ± 13.5 years). At week 16, the adjusted mean difference (95% confidence interval) versus placebo in HAQ-DI and SF-36 PCS CFB was significant for each deucravacitinib group (HAQ-DI 6 mg, -0.26 [-0.42 to -0.10], P = 0.0020; HAQ-DI 12 mg, -0.28 [-0.45 to -0.12], P = 0.0008; SF-36 PCS 6 mg, 3.3 [0.9 to 5.7], P = 0.0062; SF-36 PCS 12 mg, 3.5 [1.1 to 5.9], P = 0.0042). MCID at week 16 were reported for all PROs with either dose of deucravacitinib. Improvements of MCID or to normative values were reported by more patients receiving deucravacitinib than placebo.

CONCLUSION

Deucravacitinib groups demonstrate significant and clinically meaningful improvements in PROs versus placebo in patients with active PsA, which warrants further study.

A real-world analysis of factors associated with high healthcare resource utilization and costs in patients with myasthenia gravis receiving second-line treatment

Despite current treatments, patients with myasthenia gravis (MG) experience unpredictable and inadequately controlled symptoms, lending to variability in the clinical and economic burden of disease. However, limited data are available on MG healthcare costs, and specifically, no data on patients initiating second-line therapy. Using claims data from the IBM® MarketScan® database, we assessed patient characteristics, healthcare resource utilization, and costs among MG patients initiating second-line therapy, and identified potential factors associated with high healthcare costs over a two-year follow-up period. We identified 1498 patients, of whom 49% and 31% received chronic steroids and non-steroidal immunosuppressants (NSISTs) as their second-line therapy, respectively. During follow-up, 49% experienced ≥1 MG exacerbation. Among all patients, mean all-cause total healthcare cost was $106,821 per patient during follow-up, with $88,040 and $18,780 attributed to medical and pharmacy costs, respectively. In a multivariable analysis, variables significantly associated with high cost included use of high-dose steroids, chronic intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg, ≥6 cycles), and 1 and ≥ 4 (but not 2-3) MG exacerbations in the first year after second-line therapy initiation. Any number of exacerbations were associated with high cost in a univariable analysis. A stratified cost analysis showed that patients with >1 exacerbation, ≥1 treatment switch, and high-dose steroid use in this first year experienced $198,487, $114,037, and $79,752 mean MG-related total healthcare spend during follow-up, respectively. These data suggest that patients receiving chronic IVIg or NSISTs for MG experience significant economic burden. Disease characteristics including exacerbation and treatment history may be an indicator of future high costs.

Economic Burden of Comorbidities in Patients with Psoriasis in the USA

INTRODUCTION

This study assessed the comorbidity burden, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and costs associated with patients with moderate to severe psoriasis (PsO) compared with a matched cohort of the general population without PsO in the USA.

METHODS

Comorbidity-related HCRU (incidence rate ratios [IRRs]) and direct medical cost burden (per patient per month [PPPM] 2020 USD) in patients with moderate to severe PsO in the USA, previously apremilast- and biologic-naive, but currently treated, versus the general population were assessed through a retrospective cohort study using IBM (now Merative) MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Claims data (1 January 2006 to 31 December 2019). Comorbidities included cardiovascular, mental health, pulmonary, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, peripheral vascular, liver, obesity, and other autoimmune disorders.

RESULTS

There are increased all-cause HCRU and costs in patients with PsO compared with the general population. These differences (PsO-general population) in HCRU and costs (IRR visits; PPPM) are associated with specific comorbidities, including mental health (1.08; $372), chronic pulmonary disease (1.07; $135), diabetes (1.10; $159), hyperlipidemia (1.13; $203), hypertension (1.13; $305), liver disease (1.21; $360), and obesity (1.12; $145, all P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with PsO experience a higher economic burden of comorbidities than the general population despite using currently available systemic treatments for PsO.

Efficacy and safety of selective TYK2 inhibitor, deucravacitinib, in a phase II trial in psoriatic arthritis

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of an oral selective tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2) inhibitor, deucravacitinib, in patients with active psoriatic arthritis (PsA).

Methods

In this double-blind, phase II trial, 203 patients with PsA were randomised 1:1:1 to placebo, deucravacitinib 6 mg once a day or 12 mg once a day. The primary endpoint was American College of Rheumatology-20 (ACR-20) response at week 16.

Results

ACR-20 response was significantly higher with deucravacitinib 6 mg once a day (52.9%, p=0.0134) and 12 mg once a day (62.7%, p=0.0004) versus placebo (31.8%) at week 16. Both deucravacitinib doses resulted in significant improvements versus placebo (p≤0.05) in the multiplicity-controlled secondary endpoints of change from baseline in Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index and Short Form-36 Physical Component Summary score and in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index-75 response. Improvements were also seen in multiple exploratory endpoints with deucravacitinib treatment. The most common adverse events (AEs) (≥5%) in deucravacitinib-treated patients were nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infection, sinusitis, bronchitis, rash, headache and diarrhoea. There were no serious AEs and no occurrence of herpes zoster, opportunistic infections and major adverse cardiovascular events, or differences versus placebo in mean changes in laboratory parameters with deucravacitinib treatment.

Conclusions

Treatment with the selective TYK2 inhibitor deucravacitinib was well tolerated and resulted in greater improvements than placebo in ACR-20, multiplicity-controlled secondary endpoints and other exploratory efficacy measures in patients with PsA. Larger trials over longer periods of time with deucravacitinib are warranted to confirm its safety profile and benefits in PsA.

Trial registration number

NCT03881059.

Real-World Treatment Patterns and Healthcare Costs in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis Treated with Ixekizumab: A Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVE

To describe adherence, persistence, discontinuation, restarting, switching, dosing, and health care costs among patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) treated with ixekizumab (IXE).

METHODS

MarketScan administrative claims databases were used to select adults (≥18 years) initiating IXE between January 1, 2016, and June 30, 2019, for this retrospective study (earliest IXE claim = index). Eligible patients had one or more PsA diagnoses during the 12 months preceding the index and had 12 months of follow-up time after the index. Adherence (measured by proportion of days covered [PDC]) persistence (<60-day gap), discontinuation (≥90-day gap), switching, and dosing patterns were reported. Health care costs were reported per patient per month (PPPM) during follow-up and were assessed after adjusting PsA treatment costs for discount rates reported by the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER).

RESULTS

A total of 496 patients met the selection criteria (mean age, 51.1 years; 50.4% female). Over the 12-month follow-up, 52.8% remained persistent, 38.7% discontinued, 13.5% had no other treatment, 4.6% restarted, and 20.6% switched to a new biologic/traditional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. 70.6%of patients were identified as highly adherent (i.e. PDC > 0.80)to IXE prior to discontinuation. Dose values were consistent with prescribing information for patients with and without comorbid psoriasis. Although IXE costs ($5233 [SD = $2497]) accounted for 85.6% of PsA-related health care costs, only 3.5% of IXE costs were patient out-of-pocket expenses. Adjusting for the ICER discounts decreased all-cause and PsA-related costs by $2509 PPPM.

CONCLUSION

Results from this real-world analysis suggest that treatment patterns and costs among patients with PsA initiating IXE are consistent with prior literature for other biologics.

Patient characteristics associated with use of TNF vs interleukin inhibitors as first-line biologic treatment for psoriatic arthritis

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have examined treatment patterns among patients who use tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors for psoriatic arthritis (PsA). However, little data exist for a comparison between the TNF inhibitor treatment pattern and that of newly available biologics such as interleukin (IL)-12/23 or 17 inhibitors in the United States. OBJECTIVES: To (a) examine patient characteristics and their association with initiation of TNF inhibitors vs IL-12/23 or 17 inhibitors among PsA patients and (2) compare treatment persistence of PsA patients who initiated TNF inhibitors vs IL-12/23 or 17 inhibitors as first-line biologic treatment in a real-world setting in the United States. METHODS: Using claims data from MarketScan (2013-2017), we identified a cohort of PsA patients who initiated TNF inhibitors or IL-12/23 or 17 inhibitors. The primary outcome was treatment persistence, defined as continuous use of the index drug at 1 year, regardless of refill gaps. The secondary outcome was treatment persistence with high adherence at 1 year (ie, refill gaps ≤ 30 days). Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the association between patient characteristics and treatment initiation and persistent use of TNF inhibitors vs IL-12/23 or 17 inhibitors. RESULTS: We identified 3,180 TNF inhibitor initiators and 214 IL-12/23 or 17 inhibitor initiators. Initiators of IL-12/23 or 17 inhibitors had more comorbidities than TNF inhibitor initiators. The proportion of patients with treatment persistence was 53.0% in TNF inhibitor initiators and 53.7% in IL-12/23 or 17 inhibitor initiators; 37.1% of TNF inhibitor users and 24.8% of IL-12/23 or 17 inhibitor users were treatment persistent with high adherence. There was no difference in 1-year treatment persistence between the 2 groups after adjusting for baseline characteristics (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] for TNF inhibitors vs IL-12/23 or 17 inhibitors: 0.86, 95% CI = 0.63-1.15). However, use of TNF inhibitors was associated with a greater treatment persistence with high adherence compared with use of IL-12/23 or 17 inhibitors (aOR = 1.61, 95% CI = 1.15-2.26). CONCLUSIONS: PsA patients who initiated an IL 12/23 or 17 inhibitor had a greater comorbidity burden compared with those who initiated TNF inhibitors. Treatment persistence was similar between the 2 groups, whereas medication adherence was higher with TNF inhibitors than with IL 12/23 or 17 inhibitors during the first year of treatment. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by an investigator-initiated research grant from Pfizer, Inc (grant number: WI235988). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors. The sponsor was given the opportunity to make nonbinding comments on a draft of the manuscript. Publication of the manuscript was not contingent on approval by the sponsor. Kim has received research grants to the Brigham and Women's Hospital from Roche, AbbVie, and Bristol-Myers Squibb for unrelated topics. Merola is a consultant and/or investigator for BMS, AbbVie, Dermavant, Lilly, Novartis, Janssen, UCB, Sun Pharma, and Pfizer. Jin, Chen, Lee, and Landon have nothing to disclose.

Switch rates and total cost associated with apremilast and biologics in biologic-naive patients with psoriatic arthritis

Aim: Real-world treatment data for psoriatic arthritis are limited. We evaluated switch rates, adherence, and costs for patients initiating apremilast versus tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) and interleukin inhibitor (ILi) among biologic-naive psoriatic arthritis patients. Materials & methods: This retrospective analysis used IBM MarketScan claims data to assess treatment switches, adherence and costs. Results: Twelve-month switch rates were significantly lower for apremilast versus TNFi (15.5% vs 26.6%; p < 0.0001) and similar to ILi (15.5% vs 14.0%; p = 0.71). Apremilast initiators had lower total costs versus TNFi and ILi (US$39,854 vs US$57,243 and US$65,687; p < 0.05) and adherence was slightly lower versus TNFi and higher versus ILi. Conclusion: Biologic-naive apremilast initiators had lower switch rates versus TNFi initiators and lower total costs versus TNFi or ILi initiators.

Treatment persistence of biologics among patients with psoriatic arthritis

BACKGROUND

Persistence of biologic therapy in psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients is an important factor in individualized patient treatment planning and healthcare policy and guideline development.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the persistence of biologic agents prescribed to PsA patients in a real-life setting as well as factors associated with improved biologic drug survival in these patients.

METHODS

Patients with PsA from a large healthcare provider database with at least two consecutive dispensed prescriptions of a biologic agent indicated for PsA from January 1, 2002, until December 31, 2018, were identified and followed until medication stop date or the end of observation period. Patients were considered non-persistent whenever a permissible lag time of 6 months from the time of prescription issuance until medication filling date was exceeded. Treatment changes were based on physician decisions and patient preferences. Demographic data including age, sex, body mass index (BMI), ethnicity, smoking history, and socioeconomic status as well as Charlson comorbidity index were retrieved. Data regarding use of steroids and conventional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (cDMARDs) were also extracted. Descriptive statistics, including means (standard deviations) for continuous variables and frequencies (%) for categorical variables, were used. Persistence estimates were derived using non-parametric survival analysis using Kaplan-Meier functions, with treatment discontinuations as failure events. Cox regression hazard ratio models were conducted to investigate factors associated with drug persistence.

RESULTS

A total of 2301 PsA patients with 2958 treatment periods were identified and included in the analyses. Mean age of the study population was 50.9 ± 14 years, 54% were females, 70.4% were with BMI > 25, 40% were current smokers, and 76% were with a Charlson comorbidity index > 1. The most commonly prescribed drug was etanercept (33%), followed by adalimumab (29%), golimumab (12%), secukinumab (10%), ustekinumab (8%), and infliximab (8%). While approximately 40% of patients persisted on therapy following 20 months of treatment, only about 20% of patients remained on any particular biologic agent after 5 years. Analyzing the data for all treatment periods while taking into account all lines of therapy revealed that secukinumab had a higher persistency than adalimumab, infliximab, and ustekinumab, with a log rank of 0.022, 0.047, and 0.001, respectively. Female sex and smoking were associated with lower drug persistence (HR = 1.25, 95% CI = 1.13-1.38 and HR = 1.109, 95% CI = 1.01-1.21, respectively). On analyzing the data using only the first indicated biologic line, no superiority of any single anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha (anti-TNFα) agent was observed, while secukinumab was found to be superior as second line therapy to adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, and ustekinumab but not to golimumab with a log rank P value of 0.001, 0.004, 0.025, and 0.002, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large observational cohort studied in the era of biologic therapy, a relatively low drug persistence was observed, with female sex and smoking having a negative impact on persistency. None of the anti-TNFα agents was found to be more persistent than others as first line therapy, while secukinumab was found to be superior to other biologics when indicated as second line of therapy.

Persistence of biologic treatments in psoriatic arthritis: a population-based study in Sweden

Objectives

TNF inhibitors (TNFis) and IL inhibitors are effective treatments for PsA. Treatment non-persistence (drug survival, discontinuation) is a measure of effectiveness, tolerability and patient satisfaction or preferences in real-world clinical practice. Persistence on these treatments is not well understood in European PsA populations. The aim of this study was to compare time to non-persistence for either ustekinumab (IL-12/23 inhibitor) or secukinumab (IL-17 inhibitor) to a reference group of adalimumab (TNFi) treatment exposures in PsA patients and identify risk factors for non-persistence.

Methods

A total of 4649 exposures of adalimumab, ustekinumab, and secukinumab in 3918 PsA patients were identified in Swedish longitudinal population-based registry data. Kaplan–Meier curves were constructed to measure treatment-specific real-world risk of non-persistence and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were estimated to identify risk factors associated with non-persistence.

Results

Ustekinumab was associated with a lower risk of non-persistence relative to adalimumab in biologic-naïve [hazard ratio (HR) 0.48 (95% CI 0.33, 0.69)] and biologic-experienced patients [HR 0.65 (95% CI 0.56, 0.76)], while secukinumab was associated with a lower risk in biologic-naïve patients [HR 0.65 (95% CI 0.49, 0.86)] but a higher risk of non-persistence in biologic-experienced patients [HR 1.20 (95% CI 1.03, 1.40)]. Biologic non-persistence was also associated with female sex, axial involvement, recent disease onset, biologic treatment experience and no psoriasis.

Conclusion

Ustekinumab exhibits a favourable treatment persistency profile relative to adalimumab overall and across lines of treatment. The performance of secukinumab is dependent on biologic experience. Persistence and risk factors for non-persistence should be accounted for when determining an optimal treatment plan for patients.

Healthcare Cost and Utilization Associated with Biologic Treatment Patterns Among Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis: Analyses from a Large US Claims Database

Background

Costs associated with biologic switching and discontinuation can be high in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and their inappropriate use may have cost implications for patients, healthcare professionals, and payers.

Objective

To compare direct costs of treatment switchers, non-switchers, and discontinuers among patients with PsA who newly initiated a biologic.

Methods

Patients with PsA aged ≥ 18 years with ≥ 1 pharmacy claim for an FDA-approved subcutaneous biologic from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2016 were identified from the Truven Health MarketScan Databases. Patients were categorized into three mutually exclusive groups of non-switchers, switchers, and discontinuers, and healthcare costs and utilization during 1-year follow-up were described across the three groups separately.

Results

A total of 2560 patients with PsA newly initiating a biologic were categorized as non-switchers (54.8%), switchers (18.5%), and discontinuers (26.7%). During 1-year follow-up, after adjusting for age, sex, full-time work status, and co-morbidities, switchers had higher mean total all-cause healthcare costs than non-switchers (US$80,380 vs. US$69,031), driven by increased pharmacy (US$66,531 vs. US$56,674) and outpatient (US$10,881 vs. US$8,235) costs (all P < 0.0001). Discontinuers had the lowest mean total all-cause healthcare costs (US$50,054) but the highest medical costs (US$20,323). Switchers and discontinuers had higher all-cause healthcare utilization than non-switchers during 1-year follow-up, except switchers had fewer hospitalizations.

Conclusions

Patients with PsA who switch or discontinue biologics have higher medical costs and healthcare utilization than those continuing the same biologic. These findings highlight that  discontinuing or switching biologic therapies is associated with higher costs in patients with PsA, which may inform treatment and/or formulary decision-making.

Real-world 2-year treatment patterns among patients with psoriatic arthritis treated with injectable biologic therapies

Objectives: To assess long-term (2-year) biologic treatment patterns of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients who initiated adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, or ustekinumab.Methods: Adult patients with ≥1 pharmacy or medical claim for injectable PsA biologics (index date) were identified from the Optum's Clinformatics Data Mart (1 January 2013-31 December 2016). Adherence, persistence, post-discontinuation treatment patterns, and addition of adjunctive medications were evaluated by index biologic.Results: Of 996 patients included (mean [SD] age: 51.5 [12.6] years; female: 49.4%), the most common index biologics initiated were adalimumab (47.9%) and etanercept (34.5%). The mean [SD] proportion of days covered was 0.48 [0.32] for the index biologics. During the 24-month follow-up period, 19.7% of patients persisted on their index biologic; ustekinumab had the highest persistence rate (27.2%), followed by adalimumab (22.0%), golimumab (18.4%), certolizumab pegol (15.6%), and etanercept (15.4%). Of the 800 patients (80.3%) who discontinued their index biologic therapy, 35.0% restarted, 40.1% switched to another biologic, and 31.8% did neither during the follow-up period. The most common biologics patients switched to were adalimumab (31.2%) and ustekinumab (18.7%). Among patients who persisted with their index biologic for ≥90 days (n = 753), ≥1 adjunctive medication was added for 50.1% of patients. The most common adjunctive medications included corticosteroids (28.0% of patients), opioids (17.0%), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (13.8%), and conventional synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) (7.3%).Conclusions: In this real-world study of use of biologic PsA therapies, 24-month persistence was low (19.7%), and treatment was frequently supplemented with adjunctive medications.

Not your average joint: Towards precision medicine in psoriatic arthritis

Precision medicine, propelled by advances in multi-omics methods and analytics, aims to revolutionize patient care by using clinically-actionable molecular markers to guide diagnostic and therapeutic decisions. We describe the applications of precision medicine in risk stratification, drug selection, and treatment response prediction in psoriatic arthritis, for which targeted, personalized approaches are steadily emerging.

Treatment Switch Patterns and Healthcare Costs in Biologic-Naive Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis

Introduction

We compared treatment switch patterns and healthcare costs among biologic-naive patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who initiated apremilast or biologics.

Methods

A 1:2 propensity score match was used to adjust administrative claims data for adults initiating apremilast or biologics from January 1, 2014, to September 30, 2016, for possible selection bias. Patients had at least 12 months of pre- and post-index continuous enrollment in the Optum Clinformatics™ Data Mart database. Outcomes included switch frequency, days to switch, adherence on index treatment, and healthcare costs (total and per patient per month). Switch rate was defined as the proportion of patients who switched to a new treatment after initiation of the index treatment, and days to switch was calculated as the days between initiation of the index treatment and initiation of the new treatment. Adherence was calculated using the proportion of days covered and the medication possession ratio. The t test and chi-square, Kaplan–Meier, and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to evaluate differences between the cohorts.

Results

Patient characteristics and switch rates were similar between the matched apremilast (n = 170) and biologic (n = 327) cohorts. After matching, patient characteristics were similar between the matched cohorts. The 12-month switch rates were similar for patients initiating apremilast versus those on biologics (17.7% vs. 25.1%, P = 0.06). This trend was similar at 6 months (7.7% vs. 13.2%, P = 0.07) and 18 months (24.4% vs. 29.3%, P = 0.33). Regardless of treatment switching, 12-month total healthcare costs were lower with apremilast versus biologics (all: $28,423 vs. $41,178, P < 0.0001; switched: $39,803 vs. $51,517, P = 0.0040; did not switch: $25,984 vs. $37,717, P < 0.0001).

Conclusions

Biologic-naive patients with PsA who initiated apremilast had switch rates similar to biologic users and significantly lower healthcare costs, regardless of treatment switching.

Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a chronic inflammatory disease that affects an estimated 30% of psoriasis patients who use systemic therapy. Symptoms of PsA, such as joint swelling and tenderness, can be painful and disabling and may worsen quality of life. PsA can also impart a substantial economic burden. Treatment for moderate to severe PsA often involves the use of systemic oral medications (e.g., conventional systemic treatments such as methotrexate or targeted systemic treatments such as apremilast) or biologic therapy given by injection or infusion. Because PsA symptoms and responses to treatment can vary, patients may switch treatments over time. More research is needed to better understand how switching treatments affects healthcare costs among patients starting treatment with apremilast or a biologic for PsA. This study compared treatment switching and healthcare costs among patients with PsA who had never been treated with a biologic and who started treatment with apremilast or a biologic for PsA. Rates of treatment switching at 12 months were similar for patients starting treatment with apremilast versus those starting a biologic. Patients starting treatment with apremilast had significantly lower total healthcare costs compared with those starting a biologic, even if they later switched to a biologic. Healthcare costs calculated per patient per month (PPPM) were also lower with apremilast versus biologics, driven by lower PPPM pharmacy costs. These findings suggest that starting treatment with apremilast may be an effective and cost-effective strategy for managing PsA, even for patients who later switch to a biologic.

Validation of claims-based algorithms for psoriatic arthritis

PURPOSE

An increasing number of new medications are being developed and approved for psoriatic arthritis (PsA). To generate real-world evidence on comparative safety and effectiveness of these drugs, a claims-based algorithm that can accurately identify PsA is greatly needed.

METHODS

To identify patients with PsA, we developed seven claims-based algorithms based on a combination of diagnosis codes and medication dispensing using the claims data from Medicare parts A/B/D linked to electronic medical records (2012-2014). Two physicians independently conducted a chart review using the treating physician's diagnosis of PsA as the gold standard. We calculated the positive predictive value (PPV) and 95% confidence intervals of each algorithm.

RESULTS

Of the total 2157 records identified by the seven algorithms, 45% of the records had relevant clinical data to determine the presence of PsA. The PPV of the algorithms ranged from 75.2% (algorithm 1: ≥2 diagnosis codes for PsA and ≥1 diagnosis code for psoriasis) to 88.6% (algorithm 7: ≥2 diagnosis codes for PsA with ≥1 code by rheumatologist and ≥1 dispensing for PsA medication). Having ≥2 diagnosis codes and ≥1 dispensing for PsA medications (algorithm 6) also had PPV of 82.4%.

CONCLUSIONS

All seven claims-based algorithms demonstrated a moderately high PPV of 75% to 89% in identifying PsA. The use of ≥2 diagnosis codes plus ≥1 prescription claim for PsA appears to be a valid and efficient tool in identifying PsA patients in the claims data, while broader algorithms based on diagnoses without a prescription claim also have reasonably good PPVs.

Ixekizumab treatment patterns and healthcare utilization and costs for patients with psoriasis

Objectives: To describe ixekizumab treatment patterns, all-cause healthcare utilization, and costs among psoriasis patients.Methods: Adults diagnosed with psoriasis having ≥1 ixekizumab claim were selected from MarketScan^® databases between March 01, 2016 and July 31, 2017. Patients were continuously enrolled for ≥6 months prior and ≥3 months after the index date (first ixekizumab claim) and followed until inpatient death, end of enrollment, or end of data. Treatment patterns included persistence, switching, and re-initiation. All-cause utilization and costs were reported per-patient-per-month (PPPM).Results: 801 patients (mean age 49 years; 55.8% male; median follow-up 201 days) were included. Among all patients, 87.4% were persistent (mean (median) duration 86 (75) days) Of the 12.6% of patients who discontinued ixekizumab, 11.9% re-initiated and 6.9% switched treatments. Mean (median) time to switching was 208 (206) days. Mean number of all-cause inpatient admissions and physician office visits PPPM were 0.01 and 0.72, respectively. Mean total cost PPPM was $8,371, of which pharmacy comprised $7,792. Ixekizumab costs, $7,079, occurred primarily during induction and were paid predominantly by health plans ($6,810 [96.2%]).Conclusion: Most (87.4%) ixekizumab users remained persistent during follow-up. Pharmacy was the primary driver of total healthcare costs, with the majority covered by health plans and <4% as patient out-of-pocket expense.

Persistence of tumor necrosis factor inhibitor or conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug monotherapy or combination therapy in psoriatic arthritis in a real-world setting

This study described treatment patterns in a psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patient registry for new or ongoing tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) monotherapy, conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (csDMARD) monotherapy, or TNFi/csDMARD combination therapy. This retrospective analysis included adults with PsA who enrolled in the Corrona PsA/spondyloarthritis registry between March 21, 2013 (registry initiation), and January 31, 2017, and received an approved TNFi and/or csDMARD as "existing use" starting before registry entry or "initiated use" starting on/after registry entry. Therapy persistence was defined as index therapy use for ≥ 12 months without a treatment gap of ≥ 30 days. Among the evaluable patients with existing TNFi monotherapy (n = 251), csDMARD monotherapy (n = 225), and combination therapy (n = 214), 93, 87, and 87% were persistent for ≥ 12 months, and another 6, 5, and 5%, respectively, had no change with < 12 months of follow-up after first use. Among evaluable patients who initiated use of TNFi monotherapy (n = 26), csDMARD monotherapy (n = 35), and combination therapy (n = 15), 50, 43, and 53% were persistent for ≥ 12 months, and another 27, 20, and 20%, respectively, had no change with < 12 months of follow-up after first use. After initiation of index therapy, most changes (19-27% of patients) were discontinuation; 4-13% switched biologic therapy during follow-up. The results of this analysis of real-world treatment patterns in a PsA patient registry suggest that nonpersistence for TNFi monotherapy, csDMARD monotherapy, or TNFi/csDMARD combination therapy occurs more commonly after initiation of therapy than in patients with existing therapy. Trial registration: NCT02530268.

Patient Support Program Increased Medication Adherence with Lower Total Health Care Costs Despite Increased Drug Spending

BACKGROUND

The U.S. health care system is currently evolving from a volume-based care to a value-based care approach, which is in part supported by the introduction of patient support programs (PSP). For patients treated with adalimumab (ADA), the addition of a dedicated, trained nurse to the PSP (HUMIRA Complete, rolled out nationally in 2015) provides further emphasis on value-based care.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness of the HUMIRA Complete PSP, including the Nurse Ambassador component, in a real-world setting for patients receiving ADA across a broad range of approved indications (rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, uveitis, and hidradenitis suppurativa).

METHODS

A longitudinal retrospective study was conducted using patient-level data from the HUMIRA Complete PSP data linked to the real-world, patient-level Symphony Health Solutions administrative claims database. Commercially insured patients were included who were aged ≥ 18 years with ≥ 2 diagnoses of an indicated disease who were biologically naive before initiating ADA or who had no claims for synthetic-targeted immune modulator therapy before their earliest ADA claim in the database between January 2015 and February 2017. The first claim had to have occurred in 2015 or later, and continuous medical and drug data coverage were required for ≥ 6 months before and ≥ 12 months after the first ADA claim and index date. PSP patients (with at least an initial and follow-up dedicated nurse call) were matched 1:1 to non-PSP patients based on pharmacy type, indication, and propensity score, estimated with covariates for age, sex, year of first ADA use, and baseline comorbidities. Adherence to ADA was compared using proportion of days covered along with discontinuation of ADA, defined as a gap in treatment greater than the previous days supply with no additional ADA claim, total costs, medical costs, and drug costs (2017 U.S. dollars) over 12 months. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were summarized descriptively. Differences between cohorts were assessed using t-tests for adherence and costs and log-rank tests for discontinuation.

RESULTS

2,268 patients (1,134 per group) were included. Baseline characteristics were similar between cohorts after matching. Participation in the PSP was associated with 29.3% higher ADA adherence (64.8% vs. 50.1%; P < 0.0001) and 22.0% lower ADA discontinuation rate (51.4% vs. 65.9%; P < 0.0001). Disease-related medical costs and all-cause medical costs were significantly lower by 35% ($10,162 vs. $15,511; P = 0.005) and 29.2% ($25,074 vs. $35,419; P = 0.0004), respectively, for PSP versus non-PSP patients. Total costs were also lower by 9% ($62,421 vs. $68,706; P = 0.056), and drug costs were 12.2% higher ($37,347 vs. $33,287; P = 0.0016).

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective study demonstrates that participation in the PSP augments value-based care by improving outcomes for patients with chronic diseases by helping them not only manage a complex treatment regimen but also lower annual health care costs.

DISCLOSURES

Design, study conduct, and financial support for this study were provided by AbbVie. AbbVie participated in the interpretation of data, review, and approval of the manuscript; all authors contributed to the development of the publication and maintained control over the final content. Brixner reports consulting fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Becton Dickinson, Millcreek Outcomes Group, Sanofi, and UCB Pharma. Rubin reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Abgenomics, Allergan, Forward Pharma, Genentech/Roche, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Merck & Co., Napo Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, Shire, Takeda, and Target Pharmaceuticals and research support from AbbVie, Genentech/Roche, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Prometheus Laboratories, Shire, and Takeda. Mease reports grant/research support from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Genentech, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, and UCB; consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Genentech, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, SUN Pharma, and UCB; and served on the speakers bureaus for AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Genentech, Janssen, Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and UCB. Mittal and Ganguli are employees and stockholders of AbbVie. Liu has no financial conflict of interest. Davis is an employee of Medicus Economics, which reports payment from AbbVie to participate in this research. Fendrick reports personal fees from Merck, AstraZeneca, Trizetto, Amgen, Lilly, AbbVie, Johnson & Johnson, and Sanofi; grants from the National Pharmaceutical Council, PhRMA, the Gary and Mary West Health Foundation, the states of New York and Michigan, the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; and has equity in Zansors, Sempre Health, Wellth, and V-BID Health. Data from this study were presented in part at the Academy of Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting; April 25, 2018; Boston, MA.

Safety of Biologics Approved for the Treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis and Other Autoimmune Diseases: A Disproportionality Analysis from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS)

INTRODUCTION

The molecular and pharmacological complexity of biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs used for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) favors the occurrence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs), which should be constantly monitored in post-marketing safety studies.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to identify signals of disproportionate reporting (SDR) of clinical relevance related to the use of biologic drugs approved for RA and other autoimmune diseases.

METHODS

All suspected ADRs registered in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System between January 2003 and June 2016 were collected. The reporting odds ratio was used as a measure of disproportionality to identify possible SDRs related to biologics. Those involving important medical events and designated medical events (DME) were prioritized.

RESULTS

In total, 2602 SDRs were prioritized. The most commonly reported were 'Infections and infestations' (32.2%) and 'Neoplasms benign, malignant, and unspecified' (20.4%), and were mainly related to use of infliximab (25.3%, p < 0.001, and 28.8%, p = 0.002, respectively). Sixty-three signals involving DMEs were identified, most of which were related to rituximab (n = 27), and were mainly due to 'blood disorders'. Amongst the DMEs detected for more than one biologic, 'intestinal perforation' and 'pulmonary fibrosis' were related to most of them.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study highlight possible safety issues associated with biologics, whose relationship should be more thoroughly investigated. Our results contribute to future research on the identification of clinically relevant risks associated with these drugs, and may help contribute to their rational and safe use.

Treatment patterns and costs among biologic-naive patients initiating apremilast or biologics for psoriatic arthritis

Aim: We evaluated treatment patterns and healthcare costs of initiating psoriatic arthritis (PsA) treatment with oral apremilast versus biologics. Methods: Claims data identified biologic-naive adults with PsA who initiated either apremilast or a biologic from 2013 to 2016. Results: Medication adherence was similar at 12 months (76.9 vs 73.4%; p = 0.175) between apremilast (n = 381) and matched biologic (n = 761) patients. Apremilast users had $12,715 lower total costs per-patient-per-month (p < 0.001), largely due to outpatient pharmacy and medical costs. Conclusion: Commercially insured patients with PsA initiating apremilast had adherence similar to those initiating biologics but lower total healthcare costs.

Discontinuation and switching patterns of tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis) in TNFi-naive and TNFi-experienced patients with psoriatic arthritis: an observational study from the US-based Corrona registry

Objective

To examine patterns of tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) use in TNFi-naive and TNFi-experienced patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in the USA.

Methods

All patients aged ≥18 years with PsA enrolled in the Corrona Psoriatic Arthritis/Spondyloarthritis Registry who initiated a TNFi (index therapy) between March 2013 and January 2017 and had ≥1 follow-up visit were included. Times to and rates of discontinuation/switch of the index TNFi were compared between TNFi-naive and TNFi-experienced cohorts. Patient demographics and disease characteristics at the time of TNFi initiation (baseline) were compared between cohorts and between patients who continued versus discontinued their index TNFi by the first follow-up visit within each cohort.

Results

This study included 171 TNFi-naive and 147 TNFi-experienced patients (total follow-up, 579.2 person-years). Overall, 75 of 171 TNFi-naive (43.9%) and 80 of 147 TNFi-experienced (54.4%) patients discontinued their index TNFi; 33 of 171 (19.3%) and 48 of 147 (32.7%), respectively, switched to a new biologic. TNFi-experienced patients had a shorter time to discontinuation (median, 20 vs 27 months) and were more likely to discontinue (p=0.03) or switch (p<0.01) compared with TNFi-naive patients. Among those who discontinued, 49 of 75 TNFi-naive (65.3%) and 59 of 80 TNFi-experienced (73.8%) patients discontinued by the first follow-up visit; such patients showed a trend towards higher baseline disease activity compared with those who continued.

Conclusions

The results of this real-world study can help inform treatment decisions when selecting later lines of therapy for patients with PsA.

Persistence and adherence of biologics in US patients with psoriatic arthritis: analyses from a claims database

Aim: To evaluate the persistence and adherence of subcutaneous biologics in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Patients & methods: Psoriatic arthritis patients who initiated adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab or secukinumab between 15 January 2016 and 31 July 2017 were identified in the Truven Databases. Outcomes included discontinuation rate, persistence and adherence over 12 months. Results: Of 1558 patients included, the 12-month discontinuation rate was lowest with secukinumab (36.5%), followed by adalimumab, golimumab, etanercept and certolizumab pegol (42.6-51.6%). Mean persistence ranged from 240.7 (certolizumab pegol) to 282.8 days (secukinumab). The mean proportion of days covered was highest with secukinumab (0.67) and lowest with certolizumab pegol (0.49). Conclusion: Patients who initiated secukinumab had the lowest discontinuation rate and highest persistence and adherence over 12 months.

Persistence with biological drugs in patients treated in rheumatology practices in Germany

The goal of this study was to investigate the persistence with biological drugs in patients treated in rheumatology practices in Germany. This study included patients diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PA), or ankylosing spondylitis (AS) who received a first prescription of biological drugs between 2008 and 2016 (index date) in 21 rheumatology practices in Germany (n = 4925; Disease Analyzer database). The main outcome measure was the rate of persistence within 5 years of the index date. Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to study treatment persistence as a function of diagnosis, gender and age. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to estimate the relationship between non-persistence and diagnosis, gender, age, and comorbidities. After 5 years of follow-up, the rate of persistence was 31.8% in patients with RA, 35.2% in those with AS, and 33.2% in those with PA (log-rank p value = 0.028). Furthermore, 33.8% of men and 31.9% of women were persistent (log-rank p value = 0.035). The rate of persistence was 20.8%, 27.9%, 33.0%, 36.6%, 35.2%, and 32.0% in people aged ≤ 30, 31-40, 41-50, 51-60, 61-70, and > 70 years, respectively (log-rank p value = 0.002). The risk of discontinuation was lower in participants diagnosed with AS than in those diagnosed with RA [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.87; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79-0.96]. In addition, patients aged ≤ 30 years were more likely to discontinue their biological therapy than those aged > 70 years (HR = 1.29; 95% CI 1.10-1.52). Persistence with biological drugs was low after 5 years of follow-up in rheumatology practices.

Treatment Patterns Among Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis Treated with a Biologic in the United States: Descriptive Analyses from an Administrative Claims Database

BACKGROUND

In patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), limited data exist regarding patterns of biologic therapy use.

OBJECTIVE

To examine treatment patterns and therapy modifications in U.S. patients with PsA receiving a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) or an anti-interleukin (IL)-12/23 inhibitor.

METHODS

Adults with PsA who newly initiated a biologic therapy (index biologic) between January 1, 2013, and January 31, 2015, were included from the Optum Research Database. Biologic therapies comprised those that were approved by the FDA for the treatment of PsA at the time of the study initiation (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, or ustekinumab). Outcomes included adherence, persistence, and discontinuation of the index biologic; initiation of adjunctive medications (nonbiologics, including those commonly used for pain and/or inflammation); and dose escalation of the index biologic during the 12-month follow-up period.

RESULTS

Of the 1,235 patients included, 52.5% were female, and mean (SD) age was 50.3 (12.1) years. The mean (SD) duration of persistence with a newly initiated index biologic (etanercept [48.1%], adalimumab [24.0%], infliximab [10.4%], golimumab [8.3%], ustekinumab [7.2%], or certolizumab pegol [2.0%]) was 246 (128) days; 44.5% of patients persisted with the index biologic for ≥ 12 months. During the 12-month follow-up period, 22.9% of patients switched to a different biologic, 26.8% discontinued without switching or restarting, and 5.8% discontinued and restarted the index biologic. Of the 1,010 patients who persisted with the index biologic for > 90 days, 45.6% received ≥ 1 adjunctive medication during the period from 90 days after the index date to the end of persistence or 12 months. The most commonly initiated adjunctive medications were corticosteroids (22.0%), opioids (17.1%), and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (12.9%). Overall, 9.6% of patients had a dose escalation of the index biologic in the immediate 12-month post-index period.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world study of treatment patterns for PsA, which used a large U.S. claims database, demonstrated that the majority of patients with PsA discontinued their index biologic (TNFi or anti-IL-12/23 inhibitor) before 12 months. Nearly half of patients initiated an adjunctive medication, many of which were pain and conventional anti-inflammatory medications.

DISCLOSURES

This study was sponsored by Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Optum was commissioned by Novartis to conduct this study, but employment was not contingent on results of the study. Walsh is a paid consultant for Novartis. Adejoro was an employee of Optum at the time of the study and writing of the manuscript. Chastek is an employee of Optum. Palmer and Hur are employees of Novartis. Results of this study were presented as an abstract and poster at the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy Nexus 2017; October 16-19, 2017; Dallas, TX; and the EULAR 2017 Annual European Congress of Rheumatology; June 14-17, 2017; Madrid, Spain.

Cost and Cost Effectiveness of Treatments for Psoriatic Arthritis: A Systematic Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Psoriatic arthritis is a long-term inflammatory arthropathy occurring in a subgroup of patients with psoriasis. In addition to irreversible bone erosions, joint destruction, and skin manifestations, psoriatic arthritis is associated with numerous comorbid conditions. Over the last 5 years, new treatments emerged; the analysis and comparisons of their additional costs and the added benefits have become increasingly important to optimize the limited resources available.

METHODS

A systematic literature review covering PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was performed from May 2012 to October 2017 focusing on the most recent evidence of costs, benefits, and burden of psoriatic arthritis and its treatments. All economic evaluations assessing the burden of patients with psoriatic arthritis and written in English were eligible for inclusion. We also performed an assessment of the quality of the studies.

RESULTS

Of the 1652 references found in the literature search, nine cost-effectiveness analyses and 12 cost-of-illness studies were included in the current review. Patients with psoriatic arthritis incur substantially higher direct and indirect costs, as compared with patients with psoriasis without arthritis or patients with other inflammatory diseases. The cost of treatment with biologic therapies is the major predictor of the total cost. However, individuals with psoriatic arthritis are also affected by substantial productivity losses and indirect costs. Biologic therapies are generally cost effective vs. conventional therapies (e.g., synthetic drugs) for treating psoriatic arthritis.

CONCLUSIONS

Psoriatic arthritis is associated with a significant economic burden and biologic therapies contribute significantly to these costs. Biologic therapies are more effective than disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs for the symptoms and signs of psoriatic arthritis and for improving quality of life and inhibiting structural radiological damage. Therefore, biologic therapies are cost effective compared with conventional therapies: the increased direct cost associated with biologic drugs is offset by the significant improvement in the efficacy of treatments and in patient management of psoriatic arthritis.

Treatment Patterns Among Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis Treated with a Biologic in the United States: Descriptive Analyses from an Administrative Claims Database

BACKGROUND

In patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA), limited data exist regarding patterns of biologic therapy use.

OBJECTIVE

To examine treatment patterns and therapy modifications in U.S. patients with PsA receiving a tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) or an anti-interleukin (IL)-12/23 inhibitor.

METHODS

Adults with PsA who newly initiated a biologic therapy (index biologic) between January 1, 2013, and January 31, 2015, were included from the Optum Research Database. Biologic therapies comprised those that were approved by the FDA for the treatment of PsA at the time of the study initiation (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab, or ustekinumab). Outcomes included adherence, persistence, and discontinuation of the index biologic; initiation of adjunctive medications (nonbiologics, including those commonly used for pain and/or inflammation); and dose escalation of the index biologic during the 12-month follow-up period.

RESULTS

Of the 1,235 patients included, 52.5% were female, and mean (SD) age was 50.3 (12.1) years. The mean (SD) duration of persistence with a newly initiated index biologic (etanercept [48.1%], adalimumab [24.0%], infliximab [10.4%], golimumab [8.3%], ustekinumab [7.2%], or certolizumab pegol [2.0%]) was 246 (128) days; 44.5% of patients persisted with the index biologic for ≥ 12 months. During the 12-month follow-up period, 22.9% of patients switched to a different biologic, 26.8% discontinued without switching or restarting, and 5.8% discontinued and restarted the index biologic. Of the 1,010 patients who persisted with the index biologic for > 90 days, 45.6% received ≥ 1 adjunctive medication during the period from 90 days after the index date to the end of persistence or 12 months. The most commonly initiated adjunctive medications were corticosteroids (22.0%), opioids (17.1%), and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (12.9%). Overall, 9.6% of patients had a dose escalation of the index biologic in the immediate 12-month post-index period.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world study of treatment patterns for PsA, which used a large U.S. claims database, demonstrated that the majority of patients with PsA discontinued their index biologic (TNFi or anti-IL-12/23 inhibitor) before 12 months. Nearly half of patients initiated an adjunctive medication, many of which were pain and conventional anti-inflammatory medications. DISCLOSURES This study was sponsored by Novartis Pharmaceuticals. Optum was commissioned by Novartis to conduct this study, but employment was not contingent on results of the study. Walsh is a paid consultant for Novartis. Adejoro was an employee of Optum at the time of the study and writing of the manuscript. Chastek is an employee of Optum. Palmer and Hur are employees of Novartis. Study concept and design were contributed by Walsh, Chastek, Adejoro, Palmer, and Hur. Adejoro, Chastek, Walsh, Palmer, and Hur collected the data. Data interpretation was performed by Walsh, Palmer, Adejoro, Chastek, and Hur. The manuscript was written and revised by Walsh and Hur, along with the other authors. Results of this study were presented as an abstract and poster at the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy Nexus 2017; October 16-19, 2017; Dallas, Texas; and the EULAR 2017 Annual European Congress of Rheumatology; June 14-17, 2017; Madrid, Spain.

Comparison of all-cause costs and healthcare resource use among patients with newly-diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation newly treated with oral anticoagulants

OBJECTIVES

Compare costs and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) among newly-diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients newly treated with dabigatran vs apixaban, rivaroxaban, or warfarin.

METHODS

Newly-diagnosed adult NVAF patients initiating dabigatran, apixaban, rivaroxaban, or warfarin (index event) between October 1, 2010-December 31, 2014 were identified using MarketScan claims data, and followed until medication discontinuation, switch, inpatient death, enrollment end, or study end (December 31, 2015). Dabigatran patients were propensity-score matched 1:1 separately with apixaban, rivaroxaban, and warfarin patients. Per-patient-per-month (PPPM) all-cause cost, HCRU, and 30-day re-admissions were reported. Costs were analyzed using generalized linear models.

RESULTS

Final cohorts, each matched with dabigatran patients, included 8,857 apixaban patients, 26,592 rivaroxaban patients, and 33,046 warfarin patients. Dabigatran patients had lower adjusted PPPM total healthcare, inpatient, and outpatient costs compared to rivaroxaban ($4,093 vs $4,636, $1,476 vs $1,862, and $2,016 vs $2,121, respectively, all p ≤ .001) and warfarin ($4,199 vs $4,872, $1,505 vs $1,851, and $2,049 vs $2,514, respectively, all p < .001). Adjusted costs were similar for dabigatran and apixaban. Dabigatran patients had significantly fewer hospitalizations, outpatient visits, and pharmacy claims than rivaroxaban patients (0.06 vs 0.07, 4.84 vs 4.96 and 4.80 vs 4.93, respectively, all p < .020) and warfarin patients (0.06 vs 0.07, 4.77 vs 6.88, and 4.76 vs 5.89, respectively, all p < .001). Dabigatran patients had similar hospitalizations to apixaban, but higher outpatient visits (4.70 vs 4.31) and pharmacy claims (4.86 vs 4.61), both p < .001.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world study found adjusted all-cause costs were lower for dabigatran compared to rivaroxaban and warfarin patients and similar to apixaban patients.

All-Cause, Stroke-, and Bleed-Specific Healthcare Costs: Comparison among Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation (NVAF) Newly Treated with Dabigatran or Warfarin

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to compare all-cause and stroke- and bleed-specific healthcare costs among patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) treated with dabigatran or warfarin.

METHODS

Administrative claims data from the MarketScan® Databases for 2009-2014 were used. Patients with NVAF newly treated with dabigatran were matched 1:1 to those treated with warfarin. All-cause and stroke- and bleed-specific costs per patient per month (PPPM) ($US, year 2015 values) up to a 12-month follow-up period were analyzed. Stroke- or bleed-specific costs were defined as hospitalizations with stroke or bleed as the primary discharge diagnosis and outpatient claims with stroke or bleed diagnosis in any position. Differences in costs between dabigatran and warfarin users were assessed using descriptive and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 18,980 dabigatran-treated patients were matched to corresponding warfarin-treated patients. Adjusted all-cause total healthcare, inpatient, and outpatient costs were significantly lower for the dabigatran cohort ($US3053 vs. 3433; $US904 vs. 1194; $US1594 vs. 1894, respectively; all p < 0.001), but mean pharmacy costs were significantly higher ($US556 vs. 345, p < 0.001). Stroke-specific total healthcare and outpatient costs were significantly lower for the dabigatran than for the warfarin cohort ($US30.37 vs. 40.99 and $US7.36 vs. 12.20, respectively; p < 0.05 for both values). Similarly, bleed-specific total healthcare and inpatient costs were significantly lower for the dabigatran than for the warfarin cohort ($US50.00 vs. 73.49 and $US27.75 vs. 48.66, respectively; p < 0.01 for both values).

CONCLUSION

Patients receiving dabigatran had significantly lower total all-cause, inpatient, and outpatient costs but higher pharmacy costs than those receiving warfarin. In addition, stroke-specific total and outpatient costs and bleed-specific total and inpatient costs were significantly lower in dabigatran users compared with warfarin users.