Comparative effectiveness of injectable paliperidone palmitate versus oral atypical antipsychotics: early postmarketing evidence

Budget impact analysis of long acting injection for schizophrenia in Japan

Aims: To estimate the budgetary impact of providing additional reimbursement for long acting injections for schizophrenia patients in psychiatric hospital settings in Japan to improve patient outcomes in schizophrenia.Methods: Budget impact analysis of change in reimbursement policy using a prevalence-based model over a five-year time horizon. The results are reported as net change in expenditure and consequent cost/savings in Japanese yen at the time of analysis.Results: The budget impact analysis shows that an increase in reimbursement for LAIs could lead to cumulative savings of an estimated 36.6 billion JPY over five years. These savings result from a decrease in hospitalization costs and an increased usage of LAI (assumed to be 10%). Based on the sensitivity analysis, the saving estimates are most sensitive to change in market share of generic and branded oral antipsychotics.Limitations: Historical data were used to estimate the future costs of drug and hospitalization; however, it is not the best predictor of future, hence a source of potential bias. A good level of treatment adherence with oral antipsychotics was assumed, which is generally not the case; therefore, we might have overestimated the effectiveness of oral atypical antipsychotics. Additionally, the drug cost due to reimbursement might have also been overestimated because in clinical setting, the increase of LAI use may not have reached 10% of the market share. Lastly, patients' behavior was derived from models, which may have loosely approximated the reality.Conclusions: An additional reimbursement for the use of LAI in schizophrenia patients is likely to be cost neutral/cost saving and should be considered as a policy option to improve patient outcomes and budget sustainability.

Effects of Paliperidone Palmitate on Healthcare Utilization and Costs for Patients with Schizophrenia: A Claim-based Mirror-image Study in South Korea

Objective

Long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics, such as paliperidone palmitate (PP), are known to improve treatment adherence in patients with schizophrenia, which can lead to reductions in relapse and hospitalization rates. However, relatively few studies have demonstrated the economic impact of LAIs, especially in Asian populations.

Methods

We conducted a claim-based mirror-image study to explore changes in healthcare utilization and associated costs, among 1,272 South Korean patients with schizophrenia (ICD-10-CM code F20), between the 1-year periods before and after the initiation of PP treatment.

Results

Patients accessed outpatient services more frequently after versus before starting PP treatment, with the number of prescription days increasing by 133.45 (p < 0.0001) and the associated costs increasing by USD 1,497.15 (p < 0.0001). The number of admission days was reduced by 11.33 after starting PP treatment (p < 0.0001) and the associated costs were reduced by USD 1,220.75 (p < 0.0001). However, admission cost savings were different according to patients’ oral drug compliance. The daily dosages for benztropine, procyclidine, and propranolol decreased, showing that there were fewer side-effects after PP-treatment (p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

Although the high acquisition cost of PP has been regarded as an obstacle to its clinical use, our results imply that the high prescription costs for PP may be counterbalanced by the reduced admission costs associated with its use. Economic outcomes for patients treated with LAIs should be investigated further to help healthcare decision-makers and providers to determine the value of LAIs relative to other treatment medications.

Short-term rehospitalizations in young adults with schizophrenia treated with once-monthly paliperidone palmitate or oral atypical antipsychotics: a retrospective analysis

Objective: To compare rehospitalizations in patients with schizophrenia treated with paliperidone palmitate (PP1M) vs oral atypical antipsychotics (OAAs), with a focus on young adults (18-35 years).Methods: The Premier Healthcare database (January 2009-December 2016) was used to identify hospitalizations of adults (≥18 years) with schizophrenia treated with PP1M or OAA between September 2009 and October 2016 (index hospitalizations). Rehospitalizations were assessed at 30, 60, and 90 days after each index hospitalization in young adults and in all patients. Proportions of index hospitalizations resulting in rehospitalization were reported and compared between groups using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).Results: A total of 8578 PP1M and 306,252 OAA index hospitalizations were included. Hospitalized young adults treated with PP1M (n = 3791) were more likely to be seen by a psychiatrist (94.0% vs 90.0%), and had a longer length of stay (12.5 vs 8.6 days) compared to hospitalized young adults treated with OAA (n = 96,502). Following their discharge, young adults receiving PP1M during an index hospitalization had a 25-27% lower odds of rehospitalization within 30, 60, and 90 days compared to young adults receiving OAAs (all p < .001). Similarly, when observing all patients, those receiving PP1M during an index hospitalization had 19-22% lower odds of rehospitalization within 30, 60, and 90 days compared to those receiving OAAs (all p < .001).Conclusions: Following a hospitalization for schizophrenia, PP1M treatment was associated with fewer 90-day rehospitalizations among young adults (18-35 years) relative to OAA treatment. This finding was also observed in other hospitalized adults with schizophrenia.

Treatment patterns and Medicaid spending in comorbid schizophrenia populations: once-monthly paliperidone palmitate versus oral atypical antipsychotics

OBJECTIVE

To compare treatment patterns and Medicaid spending between schizophrenia patients initiating once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP1M) and oral atypical antipsychotics (OAAs) within four comorbid populations: cardiovascular disease (CVD), diabetes, hypertension and obesity.

METHODS

Five-state Medicaid data identified comorbid adults with schizophrenia initiating PP1M or OAAs (index) from September 2009 balanced with inverse probability of treatment weighting. Chi-squared and t-tests compared index antipsychotic (AP) exposure (no gap >90 days) duration, AP polypharmacy, and index AP adherence (proportion of days covered ≥80%) and persistence (no gap ≥60 days) at 12 months post-index. Linear models with a non-parametric bootstrap procedure compared costs.

RESULTS

PP1M patients consistently had longer index AP exposure (e.g. CVD: 244 vs. 189 days; p < .001) and less AP polypharmacy (e.g. CVD: 21.1% vs. 28.1%; p < .001) versus OAA patients. Relative to OAA patients, adherence was more likely in PP1M patients with CVD or obesity (e.g. CVD: 28.6% vs. 22.1%; p < .001) and less likely for patients with diabetes (22.0% vs. 24.4%; p = .031). Persistence was consistently more likely for PP1M versus OAA patients (e.g. CVD: 49.9% vs. 27.4%; p < .001). Total costs were not significantly different between PP1M and OAA patients for any comorbidity. PP1M patients with diabetes, hypertension or obesity had higher pharmacy and lower medical costs (all p < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with PP1M versus OAAs may reduce AP polypharmacy and increase AP persistence in comorbid patients with schizophrenia, without increasing total healthcare costs. Comorbidities are a highly prevalent driver of excess mortality in this vulnerable population; thus, future studies should specifically address the real-world effectiveness of therapies, including long acting injectable therapies (LAIs), for these patients.

Real-world data on paliperidone palmitate for the treatment of schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders: a systematic review of randomized and nonrandomized studies

The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review of the effects of 1-month paliperidone palmitate (PP1M) for the treatment of schizophrenia and related psychotic disorders in terms of outcomes reported in real-world evidence studies. A systematic review of real-world randomized and nonrandomized studies with PP1M was performed and is reported according to PRISMA guidelines. Comparative effectiveness data with oral antipsychotics indicate that PP1M has a lower likelihood of relapse-related events, including rehospitalization, and these differences are clinically relevant. A randomized, double-blind study showed that PP1M has no advantage over haloperidol decanoate in the time to treatment failure. Although there was a marked variability across studies, PP1M was not superior to other antipsychotics in terms of study completion rates. Pharmacoeconomic data show that, during a follow-up period of 12 months, the mean total healthcare cost was not significantly different in patients treated with PP1M compared with those receiving oral antipsychotics. The mean maximum prolactin levels were significantly higher with PP1M than with haloperidol decanoate; however, neither drug differs in the frequency of prolactin-related adverse events. Results on prolactin-related adverse events were inconsistent in two randomized comparisons with oral antipsychotics and were not reported in a randomized comparison with aripiprazole. There were no significant differences between haloperidol decanoate and PP1M in the severity of abnormal involuntary movements and parkinsonism, or in the incidence of tardive dyskinesia; however, patients treated with haloperidol decanoate showed greater worsening of akathisia and required treatment for parkinsonism and akathisia significantly more frequently than patients who received PP1M. In conclusion, real-world data that originate from both pragmatic randomized clinical trials and observational studies indicate that PP1M is superior to oral antipsychotics in delaying the time to relapse or treatment failure. Furthermore, the pharmacoeconomic data reviewed for this article suggest that the advantages of PP1M compared with oral antipsychotics are not associated with an increased total cost for healthcare providers.

Efficacy and safety profile of paliperidone palmitate injections in the management of patients with schizophrenia: an evidence-based review

The course of schizophrenia is characterized by multiple relapses, incomplete remission of symptoms, enduring cognitive deficits, and social and occupational functional impairments. Nonadherence to antipsychotic medication is a major determinant of this poor outcome. Long-acting injectable antipsychotics were developed specifically to address the nonadherence problem and are increasingly considered as an early treatment option, in an attempt to prevent accruing morbidity. This review focuses on paliperidone palmitate, the long-acting injectable (LAI) formulation of paliperidone. After considering the pharmacology of paliperidone palmitate, we review the randomized controlled trials, as well as pertinent observational, pragmatic studies for paliperidone once-monthly injections in schizophrenia. Finally, we review the recently introduced 3-monthly formulation of paliperidone palmitate. Taken together, the studies indicate that paliperidone palmitate (PP) has good efficacy compared with placebo and comparable with other antipsychotics including risperidone. The tolerability profile of PP is similar to that of risperidone, with the most important side effects being prolactin elevation, weight gain, and extrapyramidal symptoms. Advantages of PP include the extensive research database and clinical experience with paliperidone and its parent compound risperidone, the availability of different LAI formulations (once-monthly, 3-monthly, and perhaps even longer acting formulations in future), and the novel dose initiation procedure that provides rapid onset of action without the need for oral antipsychotic supplementation.

Adherence, healthcare resource utilization and Medicaid spending associated with once-monthly paliperidone palmitate versus oral atypical antipsychotic treatment among adults recently diagnosed with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP1M) is a long-acting injectable antipsychotic that may increase adherence rates, reduce hospitalizations, and lower medical costs compared to oral atypical antipsychotics (OAAs) among schizophrenia patients. However, the impact of PP1M in recently diagnosed patients remains unknown. The present study compared adherence, healthcare resource utilization and Medicaid spending between schizophrenia patients initiating PP1M versus OAA, among patients recently diagnosed (defined using ages 18-25 years as a proxy) and among the overall population.

METHODS

Medicaid data from five states (09/2008-03/2015) were used to identify adults with schizophrenia initiated on PP1M or OAAs (index date) on or after 09/2009. Outcomes were compared between PP1M and OAA groups following inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). Univariate linear and Poisson regression models with nonparametric bootstrap procedures were used to compare the 12-month healthcare resource utilization and costs using rate ratios (RRs) and mean monthly cost differences (MMCDs), respectively.

RESULTS

Overall, patients initiated on PP1M (N = 2053) were younger (mean age: 41 vs. 44 years) and had more baseline antipsychotic use (88% vs. 62%) compared to OAA patients (N = 22,247). IPTW resulted in balanced baseline characteristics. Among recently diagnosed patients, PP1M was associated with better adherence (PDC ≥ 80%: 29% vs. 21%, P < 0.001) on the index medication as well as less use of other psychiatric medications, compared to OAAs. Adherence findings were similar for the overall cohort. Among recently diagnosed patients, lower medical costs associated with PP1M (MMCD = $-466; P = 0.028) outweighed the higher pharmacy costs (MMCD = $322; P < 0.001) resulting in similar total healthcare costs across groups (MMCD = $-144; P = 0.553). Overall, findings were similar but there was a trend toward a lower magnitude of medical cost savings (MMCD = $-286; P < 0.001). Reductions in medical costs were mainly driven by reductions in inpatient days (recently diagnosed RR = 0.85, P = 0.353; overall RR = 0.84, P = 0.004) and in home care visits (recently diagnosed RR = 0.43, P = 0.008; overall RR = 0.78, P = 0.048).

CONCLUSIONS

PP1M patients demonstrated significantly lower medical costs offsetting higher pharmacy costs relative to OAA patients. Recently diagnosed patients using PP1M may have greater medical cost savings relative to OAAs than that observed in the overall population, highlighting the potential economic impact of PP1M in adults recently diagnosed with schizophrenia.

Health care resource utilization and costs of California Medicaid patients with schizophrenia treated with paliperidone palmitate once monthly or atypical oral antipsychotic treatment

OBJECTIVE

To compare all-cause health care utilization and costs between patients with schizophrenia treated with once monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP1M; Invega Sustenna ¹ ) and atypical oral antipsychotic therapy (OAT).

METHODS

This was a retrospective claims-based analysis among adult California Medicaid (Medi-Cal) patients with schizophrenia having ≥2 claims for PP1M or OAT from 1 July 2009 to 31 December 2013 and continuous health plan enrollment for ≥1 year pre- and post-index date (PP1M or OAT initiation date). Baseline characteristics were reported descriptively. Propensity score matching with a 1:1 greedy match method was used to create two matched cohorts. Treatment patterns, all-cause health care utilization, and costs for the 12 month follow-up period were compared between the two matched cohorts.

RESULTS

Two well matched cohorts of 722 patients were produced with similar baseline characteristics. During the 12 month follow-up period, PP1M patients were significantly less likely to discontinue treatment (30.6% vs. 39.5%, p < .001) or switch to a new therapy (21.6% vs. 27.7%, p = .007). PP1M patients had fewer inpatient visits (5.0 vs. 7.9, p < .001), lower mean hospitalization days (15.0 vs. 27.7 days, p < .001) and inpatient costs ($5060 vs. $10,880, p < .001). While pharmacy costs were significantly higher in the PP1M cohort ($16,347 vs. $9115, p < .001), total costs were not significantly different between the matched cohorts ($25,546 vs. $25,307, p = 0.853).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with schizophrenia treated with PP1M had significantly fewer inpatient hospitalizations and associated costs with no significant difference in the total costs between the two cohorts. This study is subject to limitations associated with claims data such as miscoding, inability to examine clinical severity, etc.

Paliperidone palmitate: Japanese postmarketing mortality results in patients with schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE

Paliperidone palmitate once-monthly injectable (PP1M) is approved in Japan and other countries for the treatment of schizophrenia. During the 6 month Japanese early postmarketing phase vigilance (EPPV) period, 32 deaths were reported. This report reviews potential contributing factors to the fatal outcomes in the PP1M-treated population.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

All spontaneously reported adverse events following PP1M use received during EPPV from 19 November 2013 to 18 May 2014 were entered into the global safety database and these events were analyzed.

RESULTS

During the EPPV period, 10,962 patients were estimated to have been treated with PP1M in Japan. The mortality reporting rate during this EPPV period was higher than that observed in the US or globally after PP1M launch (5.84, 0.43, and 0.38 per 1000 patient-years, respectively), but was consistent with the mortality incidence rates (10.2 per 1000 person-years) observed during interventional clinical studies in Japan and in observational patient cohorts. Of the 32 deaths reported during the Japanese PP1M EPPV period, 19/32 (59.4%) were in patients over 50 years of age, 23/32 (71.9%) reported cardiovascular risk factors and 25/32 (78.1%) received antipsychotic polypharmacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this review of the 32 fatal cases in the PP1M EPPV period, the observed death rate does not necessarily result from a risk with PP1M treatment in Japanese patients. The higher mortality reporting rates in Japan may be attributed to a variety of factors: the effectiveness of mortality reporting in the unique Japanese EPPV program, the advanced age of the fatal cases, high cardiovascular risk factors, multiple underlying diseases and high antipsychotic polypharmacy among the cases with fatal outcomes.

Antipsychotic Adherence and Rehospitalization in Schizophrenia Patients Receiving Oral Versus Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics Following Hospital Discharge

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotic medications are a central component of effective treatment for schizophrenia, but nonadherence is a significant problem for the majority of patients. Long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotic medications are a recommended treatment option for nonadherent patients, but evidence regarding their potential advantages has been mixed. Observational data on newer, second-generation LAI antipsychotic medications have been limited given their more recent regulatory approval and availability.

OBJECTIVE

To examine antipsychotic medication nonadherence, discontinuation, and rehospitalization outcomes in Medicaid patients receiving oral versus LAI antipsychotic medications in the 6 months after a schizophrenia-related hospitalization.

METHODS

The 2010-2013 Truven Health Analytics MarketScan Medicaid research claims database was used to identify adult patients with a recent history of nonadherence (prior 6 months) who received an oral or LAI antipsychotic medication within 30 days after an index schizophrenia-related hospitalization. Primary outcome measures were nonadherence (proportion of days covered less than  0.80), discontinuation (continuous medication gap ≥ 60 days), and schizophrenia-related rehospitalization, all in the 6 months after discharge. Descriptive analyses compared users of oral versus LAI antipsychotic medication on sociodemographic, clinical, and treatment characteristics. Logistic regressions were used to examine associations between use of oral versus LAI antipsychotics and each study outcome while controlling for observed differences in sample characteristics. All outcomes were compared at 3 levels of analysis: overall LAI class, LAI antipsychotic generation (first-generation [FGA] or second-generation [SGA] antipsychotics), and individual LAI agent (fluphenazine decanoate, haloperidol decanoate, risperidone LAI, and paliperidone palmitate).

RESULTS

Of the final sample, 91% (n = 3,428) received oral antipsychotics, and 9.0% (n = 340) received LAI antipsychotics after discharge. Slightly over half (n =183, 53.8%) of LAI users used an SGA LAI. A smaller percentage of patients receiving LAIs were nonadherent (51.8% vs. 67.7%, P  less than  0.001); had a 60-day continuous gap in medication (23.8% vs. 39.4%, P  less than  0.001); and were rehospitalized for schizophrenia (19.1% vs. 25.3%, P = 0.01) compared with patients receiving oral medications. The size of these differences was magnified when comparing SGA LAI users with users of oral antipsychotics for nonadherence. After controlling for all differences in measured covariates, LAI initiators had lower odds of being nonadherent (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.35, 95% CI = 0.27-0.46, P  less than  0.001) and of having continuous 60-day gaps (AOR = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.34-0.60, P  less than  0.001) when compared with patients receiving oral medications. Both FGA and SGA LAI users had lower odds of nonadherence compared with patients receiving oral antipsychotics. Similarly, FGA LAI users (AOR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.40-0.85, P = 0.005) and SGA LAI initiators (AOR = 0.34, 95% CI =0.23-0.51, P  less than  0.001) had lower odds of a 60-day continuous gap compared with patients receiving oral antipsychotics. Compared with those receiving oral antipsychotics, LAI initiators also had lower odds of rehospitalization (AOR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.54-0.99, P = 0.041); however, when examined separately, only patients receiving SGA LAIs (AOR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.38-0.90, P = 0.015) and not FGA LAIs (AOR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.60-1.34, P = 0.599) had a statistically significant reduction in odds of rehospitalization. Among individual LAIs, odds of rehospitalization only among initiators of paliperidone palmitate were statistically different from those among users of oral antipsychotics (AOR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.30-0.94, P = 0.031). While odds of rehospitalization were 33% lower among patients receiving risperidone LAI compared with those receiving oral antipsychotics, the estimate did not reach statistical significance (AOR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.37-1.22, P = 0.194). 

CONCLUSIONS

This claims-based analysis of posthospitalization adherence and rehospitalization outcomes in Medicaid patients with schizophrenia adds to the growing real-world evidence base of the benefits of LAI antipsychotic medications in routine clinical practice, particularly with regard to second-generation LAIs. As new SGA formulations become available for long-acting use, real-world studies with larger sample sizes will be needed to further delineate their potential advantages in terms of clinical outcomes and costs.

Costs and Resource Utilization Among Medicaid Patients with Schizophrenia Treated with Paliperidone Palmitate or Oral Atypical Antipsychotics

BACKGROUND

Non-adherence to antipsychotic therapy among patients with schizophrenia is a key driver of relapse, which can lead to costly inpatient stays. Long-acting injectables (LAIs) may improve adherence, thus reducing hospitalizations, but inpatient cost reductions need to be balanced against higher drug acquisition costs of LAIs. Real-world evidence is needed to help quantify the economic value of oral atypical antipsychotics compared with LAIs.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare healthcare costs and resource utilization between once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP) and oral antipsychotic therapy (OAT) in a population of Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia.

METHODS

A retrospective, observational study was performed using Truven Health MarketScan Medicaid claims data from 2009 to 2012. Marginal structural modeling, a form of weighted repeated measures analysis to control for differences between cohorts and time-varying confounding, was used to estimate monthly costs of care in 2012 US dollars and resource utilization over a 12-month period for patients in each cohort.

RESULTS

While per-month mental-health prescription costs were US$1019 higher in the PP cohort, approximately 55 % of this premium was offset by lower inpatient and outpatient care costs, producing a mean monthly total cost differential of US$434 (95 % CI 298-569, p < 0.0001) for all-cause costs and US$463 (95 % CI 374-552, p < 0.0001) for mental-health-related costs. Use of PP also resulted in a 0.44 and 0.47 reduction in the odds of all-cause and mental-health-related hospitalizations and a 0.09 reduction in the odds of all-cause emergency department visits (p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001, and p = 0.0134, respectively) over the 12-month follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with long-acting injectable antipsychotics, such as PP, may reduce inpatient and outpatient healthcare services utilization and associated costs. These findings also suggest that patients with schizophrenia taking once-monthly PP may stand a lower risk of hospitalization than patients on OAT.