Assessing the value of antipsychotics for treating schizophrenia: the importance of evaluating and interpreting the clinical significance of individual service costs

Hospitalization risk in pediatric patients with bipolar disorder treated with lurasidone vs. other oral atypical antipsychotics: a real-world retrospective claims database study

BACKGROUND

Real-world evidence on atypical antipsychotic (AAP) use in pediatric bipolar disorder is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the risk of all-cause and psychiatric hospitalization among pediatric patients with bipolar disorder when treated with lurasidone versus other atypical antipsychotics (AAPs).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used commercial claims data (January 1, 2011 to June 30, 2017) to identify pediatric patients (age ≤17 years) with bipolar disorder treated with oral atypical antipsychotics (N = 16,201). The date of the first claim for an AAP defined the index date, with pre- and post-index periods of 180 days. Each month of the post-index period was categorized as monotherapy treatment with lurasidone, aripiprazole, olanzapine, quetiapine, or risperidone, no/minimal treatment, or other. The risk of all-cause and psychiatric hospitalizations (defined by a psychiatric diagnosis on the facility claim) was analyzed based on treatment in the current month, time-varying covariates (prior treatment-month classification, hospitalization in the prior month, emergency room visit in the prior month), and fixed covariates (age, gender, pervasive development disorder/mental retardation, disruptive behavior/conduct disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, depression, anxiety, adjustment disorder, obesity, diabetes, antidepressants, anxiolytics, other co-medication) using a marginal structural model.

RESULTS

Treatment with aripiprazole (OR = 1.60, 95% CI: 1.08-2.36) and olanzapine (OR = 1.68, CI: 1.03-2.71) was associated with significantly higher odds of all-cause hospitalizations compared to lurasidone, but treatment with quetiapine (OR = 1.03, CI: 0.69-1.54) or risperidone (OR = 1.02, CI: 0.68-1.53) was not. Similarly, treatment with aripiprazole (OR = 1.61, 95% CI: 1.08-2.38) and olanzapine (OR = 1.73, CI: 1.06-2.80) was associated with significantly higher odds of psychiatric hospitalizations compared to lurasidone, but treatment with quetiapine (OR = 1.02, CI: 0.68-1.54) or risperidone (OR = 1.01, CI: 0.67-1.51) was not.

CONCLUSION

In usual clinical care, pediatric patients with bipolar disorder treated with lurasidone had a significantly lower risk of all-cause and psychiatric hospitalizations when compared to aripiprazole and olanzapine, but not quetiapine or risperidone.

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.

Hospitalization outcomes in patients with schizophrenia after switching to lurasidone or quetiapine: a US claims database analysis

Background

This study compared hospital admission rates among adult patients with schizophrenia who switched to antipsychotic monotherapy with lurasidone or quetiapine.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study used U.S.-based Truven Health MarketScan® Medicaid Multi-State Database (April 2010 through December 2012) and MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters Database (April 2010 through October 2013). Continuous enrollment for 6-months before and after medication initiation was required. Treatment episodes ended after 6-months post lurasidone or quetiapine initiation, a 60-day treatment gap, or initiation of another antipsychotic. Length of treatment episodes (i.e., treatment duration) was compared using a t-test. All-cause, mental-health, and schizophrenia-related hospitalization rates, as well as costs, were compared between lurasidone- and quetiapine-treated patients using multivariable generalized linear models that adjusted for background characteristics.

Results

Quetiapine (n = 435) compared to lurasidone (n = 238) treatment was associated with increased all-cause (21% vs 13%, p < 0.05) and mental health-related hospitalizations (20% vs 12%, p < 0.05), but similar rates of schizophrenia-related hospitalizations (14% vs. 10%, p = 0.14). After adjusting for baseline covariates, quetiapine had 64% higher likelihood of all-cause hospitalizations (OR [odds ratio] = 1.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05–2.57, p = 0.03), 74% higher likelihood of mental health-related hospitalizations (OR = 1.74, 95% CI 1.11–2.75, p = 0.02), and a similar likelihood of schizophrenia-related hospitalization (OR = 1.35, 95% CI 0.82–2.22, p = 0.24). For those with hospital admissions, adjusted all-cause admission costs were higher for quetiapine when compared with lurasidone in both the Medicaid ($22,036 vs. $15,424, p = 0.17) and commercial populations ($23,490 vs. $20,049, p = 0.61). These differences were not significant. The length of treatment episodes was significantly shorter for quetiapine than lurasidone (115.4 vs 123.1 days, p < 0.05).

Conclusions

In this retrospective claims database study, patients with schizophrenia who were switched to lurasidone had significantly fewer all-cause and mental health-related hospitalizations and similar rates of schizophrenia-related hospitalization compared with those switched to quetiapine. Patients switching to lurasidone had a significantly longer treatment duration rate than those switching to quetiapine. These results may reflect differences in efficacy or tolerability between lurasidone and quetiapine.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-3020-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A phase III, randomized, two-armed, double-blind, parallel, active controlled, and non-inferiority clinical trial to compare efficacy and safety of biosimilar adalimumab (CinnoRA®) to the reference product (Humira®) in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare efficacy and safety of test-adalimumab (CinnoRA®, CinnaGen, Iran) to the innovator product (Humira®, AbbVie, USA) in adult patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority trial, a total of 136 patients with active RA were randomized to receive 40 mg subcutaneous injections of either CinnoRA® or Humira® every other week, while receiving methotrexate (15 mg/week), folic acid (1 mg/day), and prednisolone (7.5 mg/day) over a period of 24 weeks. Physical examinations, vital sign evaluations, and laboratory tests were conducted in patients at baseline and at 12-week and 24-week visits. The primary endpoint in this study was the proportion of patients achieving moderate and good disease activity score in 28 joints-erythrocyte sedimentation rate (DAS28-ESR)-based European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response. The secondary endpoints were the proportion of patients achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria for 20% (ACR20), 50% (ACR50), and 70% (ACR70) responses along with the disability index of health assessment questionnaire (HAQ), and safety.

RESULTS

Patients who were randomized to CinnoRA® or Humira® arms had comparable demographic information, laboratory results, and disease characteristics at baseline. The proportion of patients achieving good and moderate EULAR responses in the CinnoRA® group was non-inferior to the Humira® group at 12 and 24 weeks based on both intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations (all p values >0.05). No significant difference was noted in the proportion of patients attaining ACR20, ACR50, and ACR70 responses in the CinnoRA® and Humira® groups (all p values >0.05). Further, the difference in HAQ scores and safety outcome measures between treatment arms was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

CinnoRA® was shown to be non-inferior to Humira® in terms of efficacy at week 24 with a comparable safety profile to the reference product.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

IRCT.ir, IRCT2015030321315N1 . Registered on 5 April 2015.

Major depressive disorder with subthreshold hypomanic (mixed) features: A real-world assessment of treatment patterns and economic burden

BACKGROUND

To compare outcomes for individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD) with or without subthreshold hypomania (mixed features) in naturalistic settings.

METHODS

Using the Optum Research Database (1/1/2009─10/31/2014), a retrospective analysis of individuals newly diagnosed with MDD was conducted. Continuous enrollment for 12-months before and after the initial MDD diagnosis was required. MDD with subthreshold hypomania (mixed features) (MDD-MF) was defined based on ≥1 hypomania diagnosis within 30 days after an MDD diagnosis during the one-year follow-up period, in the absence of bipolar I diagnoses. Psychiatric medication use, healthcare utilization, and costs during the one-year follow-up period were compared using multivariate logistic and gamma regressions, controlling for baseline differences.

RESULTS

Of 130,626 MDD individuals, 652 (0.5%) met the operational definition of MDD-MF. Compared to the MDD-only group, the MDD-MF group had more suicidality (2.0% vs. 0.5%), anxiety disorders (46.8% vs. 34.0%), and substance use disorders (15.5% vs. 6.1%, all P<0.001). More individuals with MDD-MF were treated with antidepressants (83.6% vs. 71.6%), mood stabilizers (50.5% vs. 2.7%), atypical antipsychotics (39.0% vs. 5.5%), and polypharmacy with multiple drug classes (72.1% vs. 22.7%, all P<0.001). Individuals with MDD-MF had higher hospitalizations rates (24.2% vs. 10.5%) and total healthcare costs (mean: $15,660 vs. $10,744, all P<0.001).

LIMITATIONS

The commercial claims data used were not collected for research purposes and may over- or under-represent certain populations. No specific claims-based diagnostic code for MDD with mixed features exists.

CONCLUSIONS

Greater use of mood stabilizers, atypical antipsychotics, polypharmacy, and healthcare resources provides evidence of the complexity and severity of MDD-MF. Identifying optimal treatment regimens for this population represents a major unmet medical need.

Geographic Variation in the Quality and Cost of Care for Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

BACKGROUND

There is considerable push to improve value in health care by simultaneously increasing quality while lowering or containing costs. However, for diseases that are best treated with comparatively expensive treatments, such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA), there could be tension between these aims. In this study, we measured geographic variation in quality, access, and cost for patients with RA, a disease with effective but costly specialty treatments.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the geographic differences in the quality, access, and cost of care for patients with RA.

METHODS

Using large claims databases covering the period between 2008 and 2014, we measured quality of care metrics by metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) for patients with RA. Quality measures included use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and tuberculosis (TB) screening before initiating biologic DMARD therapy. Access to care measures included measured detection and the share of patients with RA who visited a rheumatologist. Regression models were used to control for differences in patient demographics and health status across MSAs.

RESULTS

For the 501,376 patients diagnosed with RA, in the average MSA 64.1% of RA patients received a DMARD, and 29.6% of RA patients initiating a biologic DMARD appropriately received a TB screening. Only 17% (73/430) of MSAs comprised the top 2 Medicare Advantage star ratings for DMARD use. Measured detection was 0.59% (IQR = 0.47%-0.71%; CV = 0.355) on average, and 57.6% (IQR = 48%-69%; CV = 0.341) of RA patients visited a rheumatologist. MSAs with the highest DMARD use spent $26,724 (in 2015 U.S. dollars) annually treating patients with RA, $5,428 more (P < 0.001) than low DMARD-use MSAs, largely because of higher pharmacy cost ($5,090 vs. $7,610, P < 0.001). However, MSAs with higher DMARD use had lower RA-related inpatient cost ($1,890 vs. $2,342, P = 0.024).

CONCLUSIONS

There were significant geographic variations in the quality of care received by patients with RA, although quality was poor in most areas. Fewer than 1 in 5 MSAs could be considered high quality based on patient DMARD use. Access to specialist care may be an issue, since just over half of patients with RA visited a rheumatologist annually. Efforts to incentivize better quality of care holds promise in terms of unlocking value for patients, but for some diseases, this approach may result in higher costs.

DISCLOSURES

The research reported in this manuscript was supported by AbbVie through consulting fees paid to Precision Health Economics (PHE). AbbVie and PHE collaborated to develop the study design and protocol. AbbVie and PHE participated in the interpretation of data, review, and approval of the manuscript. Shafrin and Shim are employed by PHE. Ganguli and Sanchez Gonzalez are employed by AbbVie. Seabury reports consulting fees from PHE. The results from this study were presented in poster form at the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy's 2015 Annual Meeting and Expo; April 7-10, 2015; San Diego, California, and at the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy's 2016 Annual Meeting and Expo; April 19-22, 2016; San Francisco, California. Study concept and design were contributed primarily by Shafrin, along with Ganguli and Seabury. Shafrin and Shim took the lead in data collection, and data interpretation was performed by Ganguli, Sanchez Gonzalez, Seabury, and Shafrin. The manuscript was written primarily by Shafrin, along with Shim and Seabury, and revised primarily by Ganguli, along with Sanchez Gonzalez and Seabury.

Dosing of U-100 insulin and associated outcomes among Medicare enrollees with type 1 or type 2 diabetes

Objective

To examine costs, resource utilization, adherence, and hypoglycemic events among various doses of U-100 insulin regimens among elderly patients (age ≥65 years) diagnosed with diabetes.

Methods

Truven Health Analytics Medicare databases from January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2011 were utilized. General linear models with a gamma distribution and log link were used to examine costs, while logistic and negative binomial regressions were used to examine resource utilization and hypoglycemic events. Analyses controlled for patient characteristics, pre-period comorbidities, general health, and use of antidiabetic medications as well as index dose of insulin.

Results

All-cause inpatient, emergency room, and outpatients costs, as well as diabetes-related inpatient costs, were highest among individuals who were treated with an index dose of 10–100 units/day followed by >300 units/day, while drug costs and total costs generally increased as index dosage increased. Resource utilization generally followed the same pattern as costs, with number of office visits increasing as the dose increased and the highest hospital length of stay, number of hospitalizations, number of emergency room visits, and number of diabetes-related hospitalizations were generally highest among those in the lowest and highest index dose cohorts. Compared to patients who initiated with an index dose of 10–100 units/day, all other patients were significantly less likely to achieve an adherence threshold of 80% based upon index dose range, and while those with an index dose of >100–150 units/day were significantly more likely to experience a hypoglycemic event.

Conclusion

These results suggest that, for elderly individuals with diabetes, there is a higher patient burden among those who receive the lowest and highest insulin doses.

Changes in sociodemographic characteristics at baseline in two Swedish cohorts of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis diagnosed 1996-98 and 2006-09

OBJECTIVES

To compare baseline sociodemographic characteristics in two rheumatoid arthritis (RA) cohorts enrolled 10 years apart, and to examine differences with respect to the general population.

METHOD

Clinical and sociodemographic data were collected in 320 early RA patients during 1996-98 (TIRA-1) and 467 patients in 2006-09 (TIRA-2). Multivariate logistic regression tests were performed and intercohort comparisons were related to general population data, obtained from official databases.

RESULTS

TIRA-2 patients were older than TIRA-1 (58 vs. 56 years). Women (both cohorts, 67%) were younger than men in TIRA-1 (55 vs. 59 years) and in TIRA-2 (57 vs. 61 years). Disease activity was similar but TIRA-2 women scored worse pain and worse on the HAQ. Approximately 73% were cohabiting, in both cohorts and in the general population. Education was higher in TIRA-2 than in TIRA-2 but still lower than in the general population. Women had consistently higher education than men. Education was associated with age, younger patients having higher education. In both cohorts, lower education was associated with increased disability pension and increased sick leave. Sick leave was lower in TIRA-2 than in TIRA-1 (37% vs. 50%) but disability pension was higher (16% vs. 10%). In TIRA-1, 9% of women had disability pension compared with 17% in TIRA-2. A similar decrease in sick leave and an increase in disability pension were also seen in the general population. Older age and a higher HAQ score were associated with increased sick leave and being in the TIRA-2 cohort was associated with decreased sick leave.

CONCLUSIONS

TIRA-2 patients were slightly older, better educated, had lower sick leave and higher disability pension than those in TIRA-1. Similar changes were seen simultaneously in the general population. Belonging to the TIRA-2 cohort was associated with decreased sick leave, indicating that societal changes are of importance.

Early discontinuation and restart of insulin in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus

INTRODUCTION

Although the largest improvement in glycemic control occurs within the first 90 days of insulin therapy, little is known about early persistence on insulin therapy. This research aimed to identify predictors of early discontinuation and of subsequent restart of basal or mixture insulin among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and to assess the economic cost associated with such behaviors over a 1-year period.

METHODS

Truven's Health Analytics Commercial Claims and Encounters database was utilized for the study. Logistic regressions were used to examine factors associated with early discontinuation of insulin (basal or mixture) and, among patients who discontinued early, the factors associated with restarting. Cost regressions were estimated using generalized linear models with a gamma distribution and logistic link. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used to examine time to discontinuation and time to restart among those who discontinued.

RESULTS

Multivariate analyses revealed that patient characteristics, prior healthcare resource utilization, comorbid diagnoses, and type of initiated insulin were associated with early discontinuation of insulin and of restarting among patients who discontinued early. Acute care (hospitalization and emergency room) costs were 9.6% higher among patients who discontinued early (P < 0.001), although outpatient, drug, and total costs were significantly lower among individuals who discontinued early. Among the early discontinuation subgroup, restarting insulin was associated with higher costs. Specifically: 11.3% higher acute care costs (P < 0.001), 24.0% higher outpatient costs (P < 0.001), 80.2% higher drug costs (P < 0.001), and 30.3% higher total costs (P < 0.001), compared to patients who discontinued early but did not restart insulin therapy in the 1-year post-period.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with T2DM who were initiated on insulin therapy, early discontinuation of insulin and its subsequent restart were associated with significantly higher acute care costs, which may signal a more complex and challenging subgroup of patients who tend to be less engaged in outpatient care and may have poorer long-term outcomes.

Work disability and state benefit claims in early rheumatoid arthritis: the ERAN cohort

Objective. RA is an important cause of work disability. This study aimed to identify predictive factors for work disability and state benefit claims in a cohort with early RA.

Methods. The Early RA Network (ERAN) inception cohort recruited from 22 centres. At baseline, and during each annual visit, participants (n = 1235) reported employment status and benefits claims and how both were influenced by RA. Survival analysis derived adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% CIs to predict associations between baseline factors and time until loss of employment due to RA or a state benefits claim due to RA.

Results. At baseline, 47% of participants were employed and 17% reported claiming benefits due to RA. During follow-up, loss of employment due to RA was reported by 10% (49/475) of the participants and 20% (179/905) began to claim benefits. Independent predictors of earlier work disability were bodily pain (aHR 2.45, 95% CI 1.47, 4.08, P = 0.001) and low vitality (aHR 1.84, 95% CI 1.18, 2.85, P = 0.007). Disability (aHR 1.28, 95% CI 1.02, 1.61, P = 0.033), DAS28 (aHR 1.48, 95% CI 1.05, 2.09, P = 0.026) and extra-articular disease (aHR 1.77, 95% CI 1.17, 2.70, P = 0.007) predicted earlier benefits claims.

Conclusion. Work disability and benefits claims due to RA were predicted by different baseline factors. Pain and low vitality predicted work disability. Baseline disability, extra-articular disease manifestations and disease activity predicted new benefits claims due to RA. Future research on interventions targeting these factors could investigate job retention and financial independence.

Costs of rheumatoid arthritis during the period 1990-2010: a register-based cost-of-illness study in Sweden

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to analyse the total socio-economic impact of RA in Sweden during the period 1990-2010 and to analyse possible changes in costs during this period. The period was deliberately chosen to cover 10 years before and 10 years after the introduction of biologic drugs.

METHODS

A prevalence-based cost-of-illness study was conducted based on data from national and regional registries.

RESULTS

There was a decrease in the utilization of RA-related inpatient care as well as sick leave and disability pension during 1990-2010 in Sweden. Total costs for RA are presented in current prices as well as inflation-adjusted with the consumer price index (CPI) and a healthcare price index. The total fixed cost of RA was €454 million in 1990, adjusted to the price level of 2010 with the CPI. This cost increased to €600 million in 2010 and the increase was mainly due to the substantially increasing costs for pharmaceuticals. Of the total costs, drug costs increased from 3% to 33% between 1990 and 2010. Consequently the portion of total costs accounting for indirect costs for RA is lowered from 75% in 1990 to 58% in 2010.

CONCLUSION

By inflation adjusting with the CPI, which is reasonable from a societal perspective, there was a 32% increase in the total fixed cost of RA between 1990 and 2010. This suggests that decreased hospitalization and indirect costs have not fallen enough to offset the increasing cost of drug treatment.

Do patients with schizophrenia distinguish between attitudes toward antipsychotic medication and pharmacotherapy in general? Validation of the Beliefs About Medication Questionnaire

Attitudes toward medication are important predictors of medication adherence in schizophrenia. However, monitoring their strength and influence in clinical settings is challenged by the absence of assessments separating them from adherence and subjective response and distinguishing between attitudes toward pharmacotherapy in general and antipsychotic medications. This study examined the applicability of the Beliefs about Medication Questionnaire (BMQ) in outpatients with schizophrenia (N = 131). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) could not support the original four-factor structure. A subsequent exploratory factor analysis revealed the factors Antipsychotics Necessity, Antipsychotics Concern, and Pharmacotherapy Distrust were supported by an acceptable fit of a completing CFA. These subscales have satisfactory internal reliability, test-retest reliability, and local fit indices. Modest correlations with insight and illness perception indicate construct validity. Criterion validity was supported by a significantly higher medication adherence of accepting patients compared with skeptical patients. The BMQ is a psychometrically sound and valid measure of attitudes toward medication in outpatients with schizophrenia.

Assessment of Changes in Utilization of Health-Care Services after Implementation of a Prior Authorization Policy for Atypical Antipsychotic Agents

BACKGROUND:

In 2004, the Georgia Medicaid program implemented a prior authorization (PA) policy for certain atypical antipsychotic agents, resulting in an average savings of $2.7 million per year.

OBJECTIVE:

To determine whether implementation of a PA policy for atypical antipsychotic drugs increased health-care utilization in the Georgia Medicaid program from July 2003 to April 2006.

METHODS:

A single cohort observational study employing segmented regression and time series analysis was conducted to determine health-care services utilization, including emergency department (ED) visits, outpatient office visits, hospital admissions, and length of stay (LOS). Study subjects included continuously eligible adult Georgia Medicaid recipients with a schizophrenia-related diagnosis and documented use of an atypical antipsychotic medication (N = 12,120). Where applicable, analysis of a noncontinuously eligible population was also performed to investigate disenrollment bias in study results.

RESULTS:

A significant decline in post-policy trend for the average number of ED visits (absolute difference −0.042 per member per month (PMPM); relative difference −20.92%) and average number of hospital admissions PMPM (absolute difference −0.010 PMPM; relative difference −22.27%) was observed at the end of the study period. Baseline and pre-policy trends were found to be significant predictors for both endpoints. Significant models were not identified for average outpatient office visits PMPM or average LOS per admission.

CONCLUSIONS:

In contrast to other published studies on PA for atypical antipsychotics, patient outcomes improved after the initiation of the policy. To the extent that medical utilization reflects patient health outcomes and health status, the results of this study indicate that the PA program has potentially improved the health of schizophrenic patients in Georgia and lowered program costs.

Indirect cost-effectiveness analyses of abatacept and rituximab in patients with moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis in the United States

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for abatacept and rituximab, in combination with methotrexate, relative to methotrexate alone in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

A patient-level simulation model was used to depict the progression of functional disability over the lifetimes of women aged 55-64 years with active RA and inadequate response to a tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha antagonist therapy. Future health-state utilities and medical care costs were based on projected values of the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ-DI). Patients were assumed to receive abatacept or rituximab in combination with methotrexate until death or therapy discontinuation due to lack of efficacy or adverse events. HAQ-DI improvement at month 6, after adjustments for control drug (methotrexate) response, was derived from two clinical trials. Costs of medical care and biologic drugs, discounted at 3% annually, were from the perspective of a US third-party payer and expressed in 2007 US dollars.

RESULTS

Relative to methotrexate alone, abatacept/methotrexate and rituximab/methotrexate therapies were estimated to yield an average of 1.25 and 1.10 additional QALYs per patient, at mean incremental costs of $58,989 and $60,380, respectively. The incremental cost-utility ratio relative to methotrexate was $47,191 (95% CI $44,810-49,920) per QALY gained for abatacept/methotrexate and $54,891 (95% CI $52,274-58,073) per QALY gained for rituximab/methotrexate. At an acceptability threshold of $50,000 per QALY, the probability of cost effectiveness was 90% for abatacept and 0.0% for rituximab.

CONCLUSION

Abatacept was estimated to be more cost effective than rituximab for use in RA from a US third-party payer perspective. However, head-to-head clinical trials and long-term observational data are needed to confirm these findings.

Resource utilization and costs of schizophrenia patients treated with olanzapine versus quetiapine in a Medicaid population

OBJECTIVE

Compare annual health-care costs and resource utilization associated with olanzapine versus quetiapine for treating schizophrenia in a Medicaid population.

METHODS

Adult schizophrenia patients were selected from deidentified Pennsylvania Medicaid claims database (1999–2003). Included patients were continuously enrolled and initiated with olanzapine or quetiapine monotherapy after a 90-day washout period. Treatment costs were calculated for 1-year post-therapy initiation and inflation adjusted to year 2003. To control for selection bias, olanzapine and quetiapine patients were 1:1 matched using an optimal matching algorithm on propensity score, which was generated using logistic regression controlling for demographics, prior drug therapy, utilization, and costs. Treatment costs for the matched cohorts were compared directly, as well as using a difference-in-difference analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 6929 patients treated with olanzapine and 2321 with quetiapine met inclusion criteria. Quetiapine patients appeared more severe at baseline. After propensity score matching, 2321 patient pairs had similar baseline characteristics, including total costs. Compared with matched quetiapine patients, for the 1-year postindex period, olanzapine patients had similar drug costs ($6131 vs. $6014, P = 0.326), lower medical costs ($9897 vs. $11,218, P = 0.0128), and lower total health-care costs ($16,028 vs. $17,232, P = 0.0279). Lower psychiatric hospitalization costs account for most of the total cost difference. Difference-in-difference regression analysis confirmed olanzapine's economic advantage. Further adjusting for baseline variations, the total cost advantage of olanzapine patients was $962 (P = 0.032), and was mostly because of reduced psychiatric hospitalization costs of $992 (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

Schizophrenia patients treated with olanzapine had lower total costs than quetiapine patients, mostly attributable to reductions in psychiatric hospitalization costs.

Medication adherence levels and differential use of mental-health services in the treatment of schizophrenia

Background

Adherence to antipsychotics for schizophrenia is associated with favorable clinical outcomes. This study compared annual mental-health service utilization by recent medication adherence levels for patients treated for schizophrenia, and assessed whether adherence levels change from pre- to post-psychiatric hospitalization.

Methods

We analyzed data from a large prospective, non-interventional study of patients treated for schizophrenia in the United States, conducted between 7/1997 and 9/2003. Detailed mental-health resource utilization was systematically abstracted from medical records and augmented with patients' self report. Medication possession ratio (MPR) with any antipsychotic in the 6 months prior to enrollment was used to categorize patients as: adherent (MPR ≥ 80%, N = 1758), partially adherent (MPR ≥ 60% < 80%, N = 36), or non-adherent (MPR < 60%, N = 216). Group comparisons employed propensity score-adjusted bootstrap re-sampling methods with 1000 iterations, adjusting for baseline patient demographic and clinical characteristics identified a priori.

Results

Adherent patients had a lower rate of psychiatric hospitalization compared with partially adherent and non-adherent patients (p < 0.001) and were more likely than non-adherent to engage in group therapy, individual therapy, and medication management. Most patients (92.0%) who were adherent in the 6 months prior to hospital admission continued to be adherent 6 months following hospitalization. However, 75.0% of previously partially adherent became adherent, and 38.7% of previously non-adherent became adherent following hospitalization.

Conclusion

Adherence is associated with lower utilization of acute care services and greater engagement in outpatient mental-health treatment. Adherence is a potentially dynamic phenomenon, which may improve, at least temporarily, following patients' psychiatric hospitalizations.

[Adaptation and validation into Spanish of Schedule for the Deficit Syndrome]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Schizophrenia is a high prevalent disorder associated with huge economic and sanitary costs. Negative symptoms represent the main prognostic factors, thus to identify them is important to design effective guidelines of treatment. The Schedule for the Deficit Syndrome (SDS) is the only validated method to evaluate those symptoms as primary and stable. We propose its adaptation and validation into Spanish.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

Patients diagnosed of schizophrenia attended at 2 different hospitals were evaluated with SDS (Spanish version) and PANSS (Positive and Negative Symptom Scale). Stable patients were reevaluated 6 months later. One rater acted as gold standard while two 2 raters, naïve to SDS, evaluated patients too.

RESULTS

Twenty-one patients were evaluated (15 men). Raters agreed ranged from kappa = 0.79 to kappa = 0.89 with gold standard and kappa = 0.90 between them. Kappa ranged from 0.60-0.70 for severity criteria and 0.78-0.90 for primary criteria. Temporal stability at 6 months between raters was kappa = 0.72 and 0.87. We also evaluated interclass correlation index and homogeneity of construct.

CONCLUSIONS

After a brief training with the Spanish version of SDS, is fast and feasible to categorize patients into deficit or non-deficit forms of schizophrenia.

Interpreting the efficacy findings in the CATIE study: what clinicians should know

The Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) schizophrenia trial was an effectiveness/"pragmatic" clinical trial designed to compare the efficacy, tolerability, and cost-effectiveness of four atypical antipsychotics (olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone and ziprasidone) and a conventional antipsychotic (perphenazine) for an 18-month period in patients with schizophrenia. The study randomized 1,460 patients with fewer exclusion criteria than in most trials in hopes that this would allow for a more representative sample of outpatients in "real world" practice. Olanzapine demonstrated significant superiority in time to discontinuation for all cause and for lack of efficacy, as well as likelihood of hospitalization for relapse; however, it was associated with a significantly higher rate of metabolic side effects. Perphenazine exhibited comparable effectiveness with quetiapine, risperidone, and ziprasidone, and appeared to be as well tolerated as the atypicals. However, it had the highest rate of drop out due to extrapyramidal symptoms and was restricted to patients who did not have tardive dyskinesia (TD). This article examines the phase 1 CATIE results to guide the clinician in understanding how to interpret the findings, which were intended to be a guide for clinical practice. The nature of the patient population, the doses of drugs relative to one another, inclusion of patients who were treatment resistant, and exclusion of patients with TD from randomization to perphenazine were potential sources of bias in the study. In particular, the use of a higher-than-usual peak dose of olanzapine may have led to the superior results achieved with it. Practical suggestions are given for choice of antipsychotic medication in patients with chronic schizophrenia.

Cost-effectiveness of olanzapine as first-line treatment for schizophrenia: results from a randomized, open-label, 1-year trial

OBJECTIVES

This randomized, open-label trial was designed to help inform antipsychotic treatment policies. It compared the 1-year cost-effectiveness of initial treatment with olanzapine (OLZ) (n = 229) versus a "fail-first" algorithm on conventional antipsychotics (then olanzapine if indicated) (CON) (n = 214); and versus initial treatment with risperidone (RIS) (n = 221).

METHODS

Individuals with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were recruited from May 1998 to September 2001. Clinical, functioning, and resource utilization data were collected at baseline and five postbaseline visits. Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale scores defined "clinical effectiveness;" Lehman Quality of Life Scale social relations scores defined "social effectiveness."

RESULTS

Requiring failure on less expensive antipsychotics before use of olanzapine did not result in total cost savings, despite significantly higher antipsychotic costs with OLZ. Total 1-year mean costs were 21,283 dollars for CON; 20,891 dollars for OLZ; and 21,347 dollars for RIS (pair-wise comparisons nonsignificant). Intent-to-treat effectiveness comparisons (nonsignificant) were augmented by analyses that adjusted for duration on initial antipsychotic treatment, and by comparisons of patients remaining on initial antipsychotic treatment versus those who required switching. When accounting for differential switching rates (OLZ 0.14 vs. CON 0.53, P < 0.0001; vs. RIS 0.31, P < 0.0001), OLZ was significantly more effective than CON on clinical (P = 0.025) and social (P = 0.043) measures, and significantly more effective than RIS on the social (P = 0.002) measure. Further, patients initiated on an antipsychotic from which they needed to switch required additional resources for hospitalization (P = 0.036) and crisis services (P = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

Approaches that integrate costs, effectiveness, and treatment patterns are important for providing optimal information regarding the value of first-line antipsychotic options for schizophrenia.

The association between psychiatrist numbers and hospitalization costs for schizophrenia patients: a population-based study

OBJECTIVE

This study explores the association between psychiatrist case volumes and costs for hospitalized schizophrenia patients.

METHODS

The study uses the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database for 2003, identifying the study subjects from the database by ICD-9-CM principal diagnosis code 295. Our study sample comprises of 135,621 admissions treated by 787 psychiatrists in 181 hospitals, with the sample being divided equally into three psychiatrist volume groups: <or=300 (low volume), 301-600 (medium volume) and >or=601 admissions (high volume). After adjusting for psychiatrist, patient and hospital characteristics, multiple regression analyses were performed to determine the association between psychiatrist case volume and hospitalization costs (total, drug, and non-drug).

RESULTS

The regression analyses showed that after adjusting for psychiatrist, patient and hospital characteristics, average treatment costs associated with hospitalized schizophrenia patients were inversely related to psychiatrist volume. The respective total costs, drug costs and non-drug costs of patients treated by high-volume psychiatrists were 369 US dollars (p<0.001), 26 US dollars (p<0.001) and 343 US dollars (p<0.001) lower than those of low-volume psychiatrists. The respective total costs, drug costs and non-drug costs for those treated by medium-volume psychiatrists were 248 US dollars (p<0.001), 22 US dollars (p<0.001) and 226 US dollars (p<0.001) lower than those of low-volume psychiatrists.

CONCLUSIONS

We find that after adjusting for patient, psychiatrist and hospital characteristics, an inverse volume-cost relationship exists for psychiatrists treating schizophrenia patients. Further studies should aim to investigate the volume-quality relationship to ensure that incremental cost savings associated with increased patient volume are not achieved at the expense of quality of patient care.

Differential effects of atypical versus typical antipsychotic medication on earnings of schizophrenia patients : estimates from a prospective naturalistic study

BACKGROUND

Rising public and private expenditure on antipsychotic medications is concentrated on the cost of second generation or 'atypical' medications, which are more expensive than first generation medications and make up a rapidly growing share of all antipsychotic prescriptions. Previous studies have examined whether the higher acquisition costs of atypicals are offset by other cost and/or utilisation benefits. This paper extends this literature by examining possible effects of atypicals on earnings and related measures of labour supply in a large naturalistic study with a long-term follow-up period.

METHODS

We analysed data on earnings and other characteristics from the Schizophrenia Care and Assessment Program (SCAP), a 3-year longitudinal study (with data collection during the years 1997-2003) of 2327 adults with schizophrenia (including schizoaffective and schizophreniform disorders) recruited from behavioural healthcare provider systems in six areas of the US. We used empirical criteria and data from the SCAP database to identify 336 patients aged < 50 years who were in the stable or 'maintenance' phase of their antipsychotic treatment during the 6 months prior to baseline. Effects of atypicals compared with typicals were estimated from Tobit regression models that included additional covariates and the baseline-dependent variable values. Regression-dependent variables were reported earnings per month, hours worked per month, days worked per month and a binary indicator of employment. To control for the effect of selection bias in choice of type of atypical, we employed an instrumental variables (IV) estimation procedure.

RESULTS

For all dependent variables, our IV Tobit regressions yielded consistently positive coefficient estimates for atypical use that were either marginally significant (p < 0.1) or significant (p < 0.05) for earnings, significant for hours and days of work and not as consistently significant for employment status. Results from these regressions imply a positive effect of atypical use on monthly earnings in the range of Dollars US 107-122. In regressions that did not control for selection bias by using IVs, coefficients for atypical use were often negative and never statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that higher drug costs of atypicals for maintenance-phase treatment are at least partially offset by higher earnings among patients. These effects represent benefits to consumers as well as savings to taxpayer-supported income transfer programmes. Future studies should seek to determine if treatment with atypicals increases patients' earnings via better control over negative symptoms and/or improved patient cognition. Both appear to be connected with employment and labour supply in patients with schizophrenia, and both may be improved through use of atypicals.

Effectiveness and tolerability of schizophrenia treatment in Central and Eastern Europe: results after 1 year from a prospective, observational study (IC-SOHO)

Objective. The Intercontinental Schizophrenia Outpatient Health Outcomes (IC-SOHO) study is intended to complement smaller, shorter-term observational studies and randomised controlled clinical trials in providing information on the treatment of schizophrenia in various geographies that have not been well studied previously. Methods. Interim results after 12 months are presented for a subset of patients from eight Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries initiating or switching to olanzapine, risperidone, or typical antipsychotic monotherapy at Baseline (n=1387). Results. Patients initially prescribed olanzapine and risperidone experienced significantly greater improvements in a broad range of schizophrenia symptom domains compared with patients prescribed typicals. Furthermore, patients in the olanzapine group showed significantly greater improvements in overall and negative symptom domains compared with the risperidone group (all P≤0.05). While patients in the olanzapine group gained more weight than the other two groups, they had significantly lower odds of developing extrapyramidal symptoms, loss of libido, and sexual dysfunction. Patients initially prescribed olanzapine were also significantly less likely to have changed or added antipsychotics during 12 months of treatment compared with the risperidone and typicals groups. Conclusion. In this CEE sample, schizophrenia treatment outcomes after 12 months varied between patients initially prescribed different antipsychotics.

Service utilization and costs of olanzapine versus divalproex treatment for acute mania: results from a randomized, 47-week clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

This study examined direct treatment costs based on medication and service use data collected in a 47-week multi-center, double-blind, randomized clinical trial of olanzapine versus divalproex for patients with bipolar disorder and and experiencing acute mania.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Patients who completed the 3-week acute phase and entered into the 44-week maintenance phase (n = 147) of the trial were included. Service use data were collected at weeks 3, 7, 15, 23, 31, 39 and 47 of the maintenance phase. Analyses were conducted to address potential biases from discontinuation patterns and use of this patient sub-sample.

RESULTS

Overall, per patient yearly costs were similar for olanzapine- and divalproex-treated patients ($14 967 vs. $15 801). Psychiatric-related costs accounted for 95.4% and 93.6% of the total costs for olanzapine- and divalproextreated patients, respectively. Study medication costs were significantly higher for olanzapine than for divalproex ($4662 vs. $1755, p < 0.01). However, this was offset by the combined effects of numerically lower costs for several other services with olanzapine treatment. Some of the savings associated with olanzapine treatment compared with divalproex treatment resulted from differences in costs associated with emergency room services ($432 vs. $1346, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall per-patient treatment costs were similar for olanzapine and divalproex. Recognizing challenges in analyzing and generalizing cost outcomes from a clinical trial setting, results provide some much-needed comparative economic information regarding these two medication options for treating mania in bipolar disorder.