Contrasting Clinician and Insurer Perspectives to Managing Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Multilevel Modeling Analysis

Algorithms or biomarkers in patients with lower DGBI?

BACKGROUND

Several organizations have proposed guidelines or clinical decision tools for the management of patients with disorders of gut-brain interactions (DGBI) affecting the lower digestive tract including irritable bowel syndrome and chronic idiopathic constipation. Such algorithms are based on sequential therapeutic trials and modifying the treatment strategy based on efficacy and adverse events.

PURPOSE

The aims of this review are to evaluate the evidence for efficacy of second- and third-line pharmacotherapies and to assess the evidence for the alternative option to manage subgroups of patients with symptoms suggestive of lower DGBI based on diagnostic tests or documented dysfunctions. The preeminent tests to identify such subgroups that present with symptoms that overlap with lower DGBI are detailed: digital rectal examination as well as anorectal manometry and balloon expulsion for evacuation disorders, detailed measurements of colonic transit, and diagnosis of bile acid diarrhea or carbohydrate malabsorption based on biochemical measurements. The review also addresses the cost implications of screening to exclude alternative diagnoses and the costs of therapy associated with the therapeutic options following an algorithmic approach to treatment from the perspective of society, insurer, or patient. Finally, the costs of the diagnostic tests to identify actionable biomarkers and the evidence of efficacy of individualized therapy based on formal diagnosis or documentation of abnormal functions are detailed in the review.

Percutaneous electrical nerve field stimulation for adolescents with irritable bowel syndrome: Cost-benefit and cost-minimization analysis

Abdominal pain drives significant cost for adolescents with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We performed an economic analysis to estimate cost-savings for patients' families and healthcare insurance, and health outcomes, based on abdominal pain improvement with percutaneous electrical nerve field stimulation (PENFS) with IB-Stim® (Neuraxis). We constructed a Markov model with a 1-year time horizon comparing outcomes and costs with PENFS versus usual care without PENFS. Clinical outcomes were derived from a sham-controlled double-blind trial of PENFS for adolescents with IBS. Costs/work-productivity impact for parents were derived from appropriate observational cohorts. PENFS was associated with 18 added healthy days over 1 year of follow-up, increased annual parental wages of $5,802 due to fewer missed work days to care for the child, and $4744 in cost-savings to insurance. Percutaneous electrical field nerve stimulation for adolescents with IBS appears to yield significant cost-savings to patients' families and insurance.

Heartburn Relief Is the Major Unmet Need for Drug Development in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: Threshold Value Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Heartburn symptoms contribute to healthcare-seeking among patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Despite clinical guidance, management is often dictated by insurance restrictions. Several potassium-competitive acid blockers (PCABs) are under development as a new class of therapy. We performed economic analyses to align GERD drug development with the needs of gastroenterologists, insurers and patients in a value-based environment.

METHODS

A decision-analytic model was constructed to compare vonoprazan 20 mg daily (an example of a PCAB), common over-the-counter or prescription proton pump inhibitor regimens, and no treatment over a 1-year time horizon. Clinical responses were evaluated based on the proportions of heartburn-free days in a recent phase 3 multicenter trial. Healthcare utilization for persistent reflux symptoms was derived from national observational studies compared with healthy control subjects. Costs and quality-adjusted life years were reported.

RESULTS

Without insurance coverage for appropriate therapy, patients spend $4443 and insurers spend $3784 on average per year for inadequately treated GERD symptoms. Our model estimates that PCABs could save at least $3000 in annual costs to patients and insurers, could generate quality-adjusted life year gains (+0.06 per year), and could be cost-saving to insurers as a covered option at a price up to $8.57 per pill, if these drugs are able to demonstrate similar effectiveness to proton pump inhibitors in future trials evaluating heartburn relief and erosive esophagitis healing to regulators. Threshold prices reflect pricing after all pharmacy benefits manager rebates and discounts.

DISCUSSION

We demonstrate that aiming GERD-related drug development toward heartburn relief appears critical to align cost-effective incentives for industry and insurers with those of patients and gastroenterologists.

Abnormal gastrointestinal motility is a major factor in explaining symptoms and a potential therapeutic target in patients with disorders of gut-brain interaction

The objective of this article is to review the evidence of abnormal gastrointestinal (GI) tract motor functions in the context of disorders of gut-brain interaction (DGBI). These include abnormalities of oesophageal motility, gastric emptying, gastric accommodation, colonic transit, colonic motility, colonic volume and rectal evacuation. For each section regarding GI motor dysfunction, the article describes the preferred methods and the documented motor dysfunctions in DGBI based on those methods. The predominantly non-invasive measurements of gut motility as well as therapeutic interventions directed to abnormalities of motility suggest that such measurements are to be considered in patients with DGBI not responding to first-line approaches to behavioural or empirical dietary or pharmacological treatment.

Antibiotics and Probiotics for Irritable Bowel Syndrome

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a disorder of a gut-brain interaction characterised by abdominal pain and a change in stool form or frequency. Current symptom-based definitions and the classification of IBS promote heterogeneity amongst patients, meaning that there may be several different pathophysiological abnormalities leading to similar symptoms. Although our understanding of IBS is incomplete, there are several indicators that the microbiome may be involved in a subset of patients. Techniques including a faecal sample analysis, colonic biopsies, duodenal aspirates or surrogate markers, such as breath testing, have been used to examine the gut microbiota in individuals with IBS. Because of a lack of a clear definition of what constitutes a healthy gut microbiota, and the fact that alterations in gut microbiota have only been shown to be associated with IBS, a causal relationship is yet to be established. We discuss several hypotheses as to how dysbiosis may be responsible for IBS symptoms, as well as potential treatment strategies. We review the current evidence for the use of antibiotics and probiotics to alter the microbiome in an attempt to improve IBS symptoms. Rifaximin, a non-absorbable antibiotic, is the most studied antibiotic and has now been licensed for use in IBS with diarrhoea in the USA, but the drug remains unavailable in many countries for this indication. Current evidence also suggests that certain probiotics, including Lactobacillus plantarum DSM 9843 and Bifidobacterium bifidum MIMBb75, may be efficacious in some patients with IBS. Finally, we describe the future challenges facing us in our attempt to modulate the microbiome to treat IBS.

Metabolomics: The Key to Unraveling the Role of the Microbiome in Visceral Pain Neurotransmission

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), comprising Crohn's disease and Ulcerative colitis, is a relapsing and remitting disease of the gastrointestinal tract, presenting with chronic inflammation, ulceration, gastrointestinal bleeding, and abdominal pain. Up to 80% of patients suffering from IBD experience acute pain, which dissipates when the underlying inflammation and tissue damage resolves. However, despite achieving endoscopic remission with no signs of ongoing intestinal inflammation or damage, 30-50% of IBD patients in remission experience chronic abdominal pain, suggesting altered sensory neuronal processing in this disorder. Furthermore, effective treatment for chronic pain is limited such that 5-25% of IBD outpatients are treated with narcotics, with associated morbidity and mortality. IBD patients commonly present with substantial alterations to the microbial community structure within the gastrointestinal tract, known as dysbiosis. The same is also true in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), a chronic disorder characterized by altered bowel habits and abdominal pain, in the absence of inflammation. An emerging body of literature suggests that the gut microbiome plays an important role in visceral hypersensitivity. Specific microbial metabolites have an intimate relationship with host receptors that are highly expressed on host cell and neurons, suggesting that microbial metabolites play a key role in visceral hypersensitivity. In this review, we will discuss the techniques used to analysis the metabolome, current potential metabolite targets for visceral hypersensitivity, and discuss the current literature that evaluates the role of the post-inflammatory microbiota and metabolites in visceral hypersensitivity.

2021 National Survey on Prior Authorization Burden and Its Impact on Gastroenterology Practice

INTRODUCTION

Prior authorizations (PAs) are intended to control prescription drug expenditures.

METHODS

One hundred fifty-six physician and advanced practice provider members of the American College of Gastroenterology completed a national survey to assess PA burden and impact.

RESULTS

One-half of PA requests relate to prescription refills. Greater than 50% of the respondents choose inferior treatments at least weekly because of perceived PA burden for preferred agents. One-half of the respondents reported a patient who experienced serious adverse events due to PA-related care delays.

DISCUSSION

PA is an administrative burden that exhausts practice resources and may have a negative impact on patient care.

Baseline Predictors of Discontinuation of Prescription Drug Therapy for IBS-C: Cohort Analysis at an Integrated Healthcare System

BACKGROUND

Effective prescription drug treatment of constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-C) requires patients to remain on daily therapy, yet predictive factors to optimize treatment selection are unknown.

AIMS

We assessed whether common comorbidities including chronic overlapping pain conditions (COPCs), mood disorders, or concurrent medications influence the risk of discontinuing IBS-C prescription drug therapy.

METHODS

We included all IBS-C patients who initiated treatment with the secretagogues linaclotide or lubiprostone across the Michigan Medicine healthcare system between 2012 and 2016. A Cox proportional hazards model was constructed to model time-to-treatment discontinuation as a valid, quantifiable measure of IBS medication persistence using hazards ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Our cohort included 225 patients on linaclotide and 492 on lubiprostone (mean age 48.3 years, 86.9% women, 46.6% with at least one COPC, 60.3% with at least one mood disorder) with an average follow-up of 2.1 years. Patients with at least one COPC (HR = 0.566; 95%CI = 0.371-0.863) and also women (HR = 0.535; 95%CI = 0.307-0.934) had a lower risk of discontinuing linaclotide, while COPCs predicted a trend toward increased discontinuation of lubiprostone (HR = 1.254; 95%CI = 0.997-1.576). Age, comorbid mood disorders, and baseline use of narcotics or benzodiazepines did not significantly mediate the risk of treatment discontinuation; our findings remained stable in univariate and multivariable analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

COPCs and sex appear to influence the likelihood of discontinuation of two commonly prescribed secretagogues, while mood disorders, narcotics, and benzodiazepines may not. Routine assessment for comorbid COPCs prior to initiating therapy may optimize IBS-C treatment selection and outcomes in practice.

Comparing Costs and Outcomes of Treatments for Irritable Bowel Syndrome With Diarrhea: Cost-Benefit Analysis

BACKGROUND

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is one of the most expensive gastroenterological conditions and is an ideal target for developing a value-based care model. We assessed the comparative cost-benefit of treatments for IBS with diarrhea (IBS-D), the most common IBS subtype from insurer and patient perspectives.

METHODS

We constructed a decision analytic model assessing trade-offs among guideline-recommended and recently FDA-approved drugs, supplements, low FODMAP diet, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). Outcomes and costs were derived from systematic reviews of clinical trials and national databases. Health-gains were represented using quality-adjusted life years (QALY).

RESULTS

From an insurer perspective, on-label prescription drugs (rifaximin, eluxadoline, alosetron) were significantly more expensive than off-label treatments, low FODMAP, or CBT. Insurer treatment preferences were driven by average wholesale prescription drug prices and were not affected by health gains in sensitivity analysis within standard willingness-to-pay ranges up to $150,000/QALY-gained. From a patient perspective, prescription drug therapies and neuromodulators appeared preferable due to a reduction in lost wages due to IBS with effective therapy, and also considering out-of-pocket costs of low FODMAP food and out-of-pocket costs to attend CBT appointments. Comparative health outcomes exerted influence on treatment preferences from a patient perspective in cost-benefit analysis depending on a patients' willingness-to-pay threshold for additional health-gains, but health outcomes were less important than out-of-pocket costs at lower willingness-to-pay thresholds.

CONCLUSIONS

Costs are critical determinants of IBS treatment value to patients and insurers, but different costs drive patient and insurer treatment preferences. Divergent cost drivers appear to explain misalignment between patient and insurer IBS treatment preferences in practice.

Price Is Right: Exploring Prescription Drug Coverage Barriers for Irritable Bowel Syndrome Using Threshold Pricing Analysis

BACKGROUND

Prescription drug costs exert profound effects on commercial insurance coverage and access to effective therapy.

AIMS

We aimed to assess threshold pricing to achieve budget neutrality of FDA-approved drugs treating irritable bowel syndrome from an insurance perspective, based on cost-savings resulting in decreased healthcare utilization through effective disease management.

METHODS

We constructed a decision-analytic model from an insurance perspective to assess the budget impact of IBS prescription drugs under usual insurance coverage levels in practice: (1) unrestricted drug access or (2) step therapy in a primary care population of middle-age, care-seeking IBS patients. Budget-neutral drug prices were then calculated which resulted in $0 budget impact to insurers with a short-term, one-year time horizon.

RESULTS

If used according to FDA labeling, IBS-D drugs cost between $4778 and $16,844 per year and IBS-C drugs cost between $4319 and $4955 per year. These drug costs often exceed insurance expenditures of $6999 for IBS-D and $3929 for IBS-C if left untreated. Therefore, for drugs to have $0 budget impact to insurers, their prices would need to be discounted 36.7-74.2% for IBS-D drugs and 59.3-82.5% for IBS-C. IBS drugs are already priced to support step therapy "failing one of several common, inexpensive IBS treatments with a responder rate > 30-40%," reflecting the subpopulation with more severe disease and greater healthcare costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Broader prescription drug coverage for patients failing common, inexpensive IBS treatments to which at least 30-40% of patients would typically respond appears warranted to enable gastroenterologists to offer personalized approaches targeting specific mechanisms of this heterogeneous disease.

Diarrhea-Predominant and Constipation-Predominant Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Current Prescription Drug Treatment Options

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a heterogenous disease with a variety of therapeutic options, including eight prescription drugs approved for use in IBS in the USA. Choosing among the myriad treatment options requires attention to patient preferences both on clinical outcomes and costs associated with treatment. We performed a narrative review of the literature to summarize these important determinants of treatment choice including: labeled indications; clinical profiles of efficacy, safety, and tolerability of prescription drugs; and cost-effectiveness for diarrhea-predominant IBS drugs (IBS-D: alosetron, eluxadoline, and rifaximin) and constipation-predominant IBS drugs (IBS-C: linaclotide, lubiprostone, plecanatide, tegaserod, and tenapanor). We then review the standard model of shared decision-making aimed at guiding an informed, patient-centered discussion to integrate comparative clinical and cost outcomes toward choosing an IBS treatment in practice.

Evaluating the Impact of Cost on the Treatment Algorithm for Chronic Idiopathic Constipation: Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) is a common and burdensome illness. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of the US Food and Drug Administration-approved CIC drugs to evaluate and quantify treatment preferences compared with usual care from insurer and patient perspectives.

METHODS

We evaluated the subset of patients with CIC and documented failure of over-the-counter (OTC) osmotic or bulk-forming laxatives. A RAND/UCLA consensus panel of 8 neurogastroenterologists informed model design. Treatment outcomes and costs were defined using integrated analyses of registered clinical trials and the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services-supported cost databases. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated using health utilities derived from clinical trials. A 12-week time horizon was used.

RESULTS

With continued OTC laxatives, CIC-related costs were $569 from an insurer perspective compared with $3,154 from a patient perspective (considering lost wages and out-of-pocket expenses). CIC prescription drugs increased insurer costs by $618-$1,015 but decreased patient costs by $327-$1,117. Effectiveness of CIC drugs was similar (0.02 QALY gained/12 weeks or ∼7 healthy days gained/year). From an insurer perspective, prescription drugs (linaclotide, prucalopride, and plecanatide) seemed less cost-effective than continued OTC laxatives (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio >$150,000/QALY gained). From a patient perspective, the cost-effective algorithm started with plecanatide, followed by choosing between prucalopride and linaclotide starting at the 145-μg dose (favoring prucalopride among patients whose disease affects their work productivity). The patient perspective was driven by drug tolerability and treatment effects on quality of life.

DISCUSSION

Addressing costs at a policy level has the potential to enable patients and clinicians to move from navigating barriers in treatment access toward truly optimizing treatment choice.

Pharmacologic, Dietary, and Psychological Treatments for Irritable Bowel Syndrome With Constipation: Cost Utility Analysis

Introduction. Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is the most common gastroenterology referral and one of the most common gastrointestinal complaints in primary care. We performed a cost-utility analysis of the most common treatments available in general practice for IBS with constipation (IBS-C), the most expensive IBS subtype. Methods. We developed a decision analytic model evaluating guideline-recommended and Food and Drug Administration-approved drugs, supplements, and dietary/psychological interventions. Model inputs were derived from "global symptom improvement" outcomes in systematic reviews of clinical trials. Costs were derived from national datasets. Analysis was performed with a 1-year time horizon from patient and payer perspectives. We analyzed a prototypical managed-care health plan with no cost-sharing to the patient. Results. From a payer perspective, global IBS treatments (including low FODMAP, cognitive behavioral therapy [CBT], neuromodulators), which are not specific to the IBS-C bowel subtype were less expensive than on-label prescription drug treatments. From a patient perspective, on-label prescription drug treatment with linaclotide was the least expensive treatment strategy. Drug prices and costs to manage untreated IBS-C were most important determinants of payer treatment preferences. Effects of treatment on missed work-days and need for repeated appointments to complete treatment were the most important determinants of treatment preference to patients. Discussion. Due mostly to prescription drug prices, neuromodulators, low FODMAP, and CBT appear cost-effective compared to on-label drug treatments from a payer perspective in cost-utility analysis. These findings may explain common treatment barriers in clinical practice.