Cost-effectiveness and clinical outcomes of intermittent/continuous proton pump inhibitors infusion in high bleeding risk of ulcers: A retrospective observational cohort study

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes, including patient prognosis and medication expense, of proton pump inhibitors administered by high-dose continuous infusion (HDC, 80 mg loading dose, then 8 mg/h for 72 hours) or non-high-dose intermittent infusion (NHDI, 40 mg qd or 40 mg q12 h, for 3 days) regimens in high-risk patients with bleeding peptic ulcers.In this retrospective cohort study, patients with peptic ulcers and endoscopic hemostasis between January, 2013 and December, 2015 were included. The primary endpoints were rebleeding and mortality rates within 7 days. The secondary endpoints were length of stay (LOS), transfusion units of packed red blood cells (PRBCs), and the number needed to treat.A total of 335 patients met the inclusion criteria during the 3-year follow-up period. The cumulative incidence of rebleeding within 7 days was 20.4% and 11.2% in the HDC and NHDI groups, respectively, with a significant difference (P = .021). The mortality rate was 12.1% and 7.3% in the HDC and NHDI groups, respectively, with no significant difference (P = .136). Univariate Cox proportional hazards model analysis showed that the risk of rebleeding within 7 days in the HDC group was higher than that in the NHDI group. The hazard ratio for HDC vs. NHDI was 1.93 (P = .021). There were significant differences in LOS (P = .034) and PRBC units (P = .005) for risk of rebleeding within 7 days, as well as in transfusion units of PRBCs for mortality rate analysis (p < 0.001), between the HDC and NHDI groups. The results showed that the NHDI regimen could reduce the risk of rebleeding within 7 days in 1 of 11 patients (number needed to treat = 11) and could reduce medication cost by US$ 400 to 800.The NHDI regimen showed a lower risk of rebleeding within 7 days, shorter LOS, and fewer PRBC units than that of the HDC regimen. Receiving NHDI has better cost-effective outcomes than that of HDC for patients with high-risk bleeding peptic ulcers.

[Influential factors in the quality of prescription in primary care and relation to pharmaceutical expenditure]

OBJECTIVE

The high pharmaceutical consumption requires establishing improvement measures with the collaboration of all the agents involved. The objective of the study was to analyze the pharmaceutical expenditure generated by prescriptions made by physicians working in a primary care area and assess its relationship with the quality indicators of the prescription.

METHODS

The prescriptions of 200 family physicians of the Basque Health Service Araba Countyand dispensed by the community pharmacies between 2009 and 2016 were studied. The variables evaluated retrospectively corresponded to the quality indicators of the pharmaceutical prescription included in the Contract-Program of the Basque Department Health of 2016. Prediction models were developed using linear regression and binary logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

The main factors which increased the pharmaceutical expenditure per person were: the use of novel drugs which do not offer therapeutic improvements, the proportion of pensioners, the use of statins and the use of antiulcer the proton pump inhibitors (PPI). On the contrary, the factors that reduced this expense were: the seniority in the medical position, the physician job stability and the prescription quality index. The profile of the doctor who generated the greatest expense of pharmaceutical prescription was mainly that of a professional who was responsible for a high percentage of pensioners, prescribed a high amount of inhibitors of the enzyme angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI), prescribed a high amount of first level non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and also showed high use of antiulcer PPI.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a statistically significant correlation between physicians who generate lower pharmaceutical expenditure and have a higher quality of prescription. The most influencing factors in the pharmaceutical expenditure are a high percentage of pensioners in the medical quota, the use of novel drugs that do not provide therapeutic improvements and the prescription of statins and anti-ulcer PPI drugs.

Cost-effectiveness analysis and effectiveness of pharmacist-managed outpatient clinics in Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy

BACKGROUND

Helicobacter pylori is involved in many upper gastrointestinal diseases such as peptic ulcers and gastric cancers. In this study, we compared the cost-effectiveness of lansoprazole and vonoprazan in H. pylori eradication therapy and examined the effectiveness of pharmacist-managed outpatient clinics.

METHODS

We investigated the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of pharmacist-managed outpatient clinics in H. pylori eradication therapy at our hospital from January 2015 to December 2017. The subjects were classified into three groups: lansoprazole group; vonoprazan group; and the medication instruction group, which received instructions at the pharmacist-managed outpatient clinics (intervention group). We examined the eradication rate and cost-effectiveness ratio of each group.

RESULTS

The eradication rate of primary eradication therapy was 75.2% in the lansoprazole group, 87.8% in the vonoprazan group and 91.4% in the intervention group. When mental component summary was used as quality of life score, cost-effectiveness ratio was 224.7 yen in lansoprazole group, 223.9 yen in vonoprazan group and 222.2 yen in intervention group. Setting up pharmacist-managed outpatient clinics increases the pharmacist labour cost necessary for eradication therapy. However, if the medication instructions provided by the pharmacist can lead to improved disinfection efficiency, improvement in cost efficiency can be expected.

CONCLUSION

Although medication instructions provided at the pharmacist-managed outpatient clinics incur additional labour costs, they improve patient quality of life as well as disinfection rate in H. pylori eradication therapy. Therefore, pharmacist-managed outpatient clinics are useful from the viewpoint of pharmacoeconomics.

Economic impact of potentially inappropriate prescribing and related adverse events in older people: a cost-utility analysis using Markov models

OBJECTIVES

To determine the economic impact of three drugs commonly involved in potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) in adults aged ≥65 years, including their adverse effects (AEs): long-term use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), benzodiazepines and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) at maximal dose; to assess cost-effectiveness of potential interventions to reduce PIP of each drug.

DESIGN

Cost-utility analysis. We developed Markov models incorporating the AEs of each PIP, populated with published estimates of probabilities, health system costs (in 2014 euro) and utilities.

PARTICIPANTS

A hypothetical cohort of 65 year olds analysed over 35 1-year cycles with discounting at 5% per year.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Incremental cost, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios with 95% credible intervals (CIs, generated in probabilistic sensitivity analysis) between each PIP and an appropriate alternative strategy. Models were then used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of potential interventions to reduce PIP for each of the three drug classes.

RESULTS

All three PIP drugs and their AEs are associated with greater cost and fewer QALYs compared with alternatives. The largest reduction in QALYs and incremental cost was for benzodiazepines compared with no sedative medication (€3470, 95% CI €2434 to €5001; -0.07 QALYs, 95% CI -0.089 to -0.047), followed by NSAIDs relative to paracetamol (€806, 95% CI €415 and €1346; -0.07 QALYs, 95% CI -0.131 to -0.026), and maximal dose PPIs compared with maintenance dose PPIs (€989, 95% CI -€69 and €2127; -0.01 QALYs, 95% CI -0.029 to 0.003). For interventions to reduce PIP, at a willingness-to-pay of €45 000 per QALY, targeting NSAIDs would be cost-effective up to the highest intervention cost per person of €1971. For benzodiazepine and PPI interventions, the equivalent cost was €1480 and €831, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term benzodiazepine and NSAID prescribing are associated with significantly increased costs and reduced QALYs. Targeting inappropriate NSAID prescribing appears to be the most cost-effective PIP intervention.

Rethinking the laryngopharyngeal reflux treatment algorithm: Evaluating an alternate empiric dosing regimen and considering up-front, pH-impedance, and manometry testing to minimize cost in treating suspect laryngopharyngeal reflux disease

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

Empiric proton pump inhibitor (PPI) trials for laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) are common. A majority of the patients respond to acid suppression. This work intends to evaluate once-daily, 40 mg omeprazole and once-nightly, 300 mg ranitidine (QD/QHS) dosing as an alternative regimen, and use this study's cohort to evaluate empiric regimens prescribed for LPR as compared to up-front testing with pH impedance multichannel intraluminal impedance (MII) with dual pH probes and high-resolution manometry (HRM) for potential cost minimization.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort review and cost minimization study.

METHODS

A chart review identified patients diagnosed with LPR. All subjects were treated sequentially and outcomes recorded. Initial QD/QHS dosing increased after 3 months to BID if no improvement and ultimately prescribed MII and HRM if they failed BID dosing. Decision tree diagrams were constructed to determine costs of two empiric regimens and up-front MII and HRM.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven subjects met the criteria. Responders and nonresponders to empiric therapy were identified. Seventy-two subjects (74%) responded. Forty-eight (67% of responders and 49% of all) improved with QD/QHS dosing. Forty-nine (51%) subjects escalated to BID dosing. Twenty-four subjects (33% of responders and 25% of all) improved on BID therapy. Twenty-five subjects (26%) did not respond to acid suppression. Average weighted cost was $1,897.00 per patient for up-front testing, $3,033.00 for initial BID, and $3,366.00 for initial QD/QHS.

CONCLUSIONS

An alternate QD/QHS regimen improved the majority who presented with presumed LPR. Cost estimates demonstrate that the QD/QHS regimen was more expensive than the initial BID high-dose PPI for 6 months. Overall per-patient cost appears less with up-front MII and HRM.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4. Laryngoscope, 127:S1-S13, 2017.

The budget impact of using enteric-coated aspirin 325 mg + immediate-release omeprazole 40 mg to prevent recurrent cardiovascular events

OBJECTIVE

Aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid; ASA) is commonly used for secondary prevention of cardiovascular (CV) events, but may be associated with gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events, which can reduce adherence. Use of ASA co-therapy with proton pump inhibitors in patients at risk may be suboptimal. PA32540 (Yosprala™) is a coordinated-delivery tablet combining EC-ASA 325 mg and immediate-release omeprazole 40 mg. The objective of this flexible budget impact model was to project the financial consequences of introducing PA32540 325 mg/40 mg to prevent recurrent CV events, while reducing ASA-associated GI events in US adults.

METHODS

A Markov Model was employed to estimate health state transitions associated with ASA 75-325 mg, ASA 75-325 mg + generic delayed-release omeprazole 40 mg, PA32540, or clopidogrel 75 mg to prevent recurrent CV events. Health states included ulcers, GI bleeding, CV events, and death. Model inputs included demographics, treatment dosages, treatment costs, adverse GI and CV events, and premature death. Data from peer-reviewed literature and censuses enabled appropriate allocation of CV and GI disease prevalence and mortality. The PA32540 non-adherence rate was conservatively set at 20%. PA32540 market share was set to 50%.

RESULTS

The model projected annual savings of $81.0 million to $190.9 million within 1-5 years after PA32540 introduction to the plan, which included 134,558 members at risk for recurrent CV events. These values translate into savings of $602 (year 5) to $1,419 (year 1) per patient per year, and $81 (year 5) to $191 (year 1) per member per year. These values were robust to variations in parameters under a deterministic sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSION

PA32540 use to prevent recurrent CV events was associated with cost reductions in each year examined with the model. From a health plan perspective, PA32540 is likely to have a net overall effect, resulting in significant cost savings.

Medical cost, incidence rate, and treatment status of gastroesophageal reflux disease in Japan: analysis of claims data

OBJECTIVES

Published reports have shown the prevalence and incidence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is increasing in Japan. The objective of this study is to examine change in GERD incidence, and to understand current patient demographics, medical costs, treatment status, and the suitability of current treatment based on analysis of an insurance claims database.

METHODS

An insurance claims database with data on ∼1.9 million company employees from January 2005 to May 2015 was used. Prevalence, demographics, and medical costs were analyzed by cross-sectional analysis, and incidence and treatment status were analyzed by longitudinal analysis among newly-diagnosed GERD patients.

RESULTS

GERD prevalence in 2014 was 3.3% among 20-59 year-olds, accounting for 40,134 people in the database, and GERD incidence increased from 0.63% in 2009 to 0.98% in 2014. In 2014, mean medical cost per patient per month for GERD patients aged 20-59 was JPY 31,900 (USD 266 as of January 2016), which was ∼2.4-times the mean national healthcare cost. The most frequently prescribed drugs for newly-diagnosed GERD patients were proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Although PPIs were prescribed more often in patients with more doctor visit months, over 20% of patients that made frequent doctor visits (19 or more visits during a 24 calendar months period) were prescribed PPIs during only 1 calendar month or not at all.

LIMITATIONS

The database included only reimbursable claims data and, therefore, did not cover over-the-counter drugs. The database also consisted of employee-based claims data, so included little data on people aged 60 years and older.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the increasing incidence of GERD in Japan there is a need for up-to-date information on GERD incidence. This study suggests that some GERD patients may not be receiving appropriate treatment according to Japanese guidelines, which is needed to improve symptom control.

Cost-Effectiveness of Proton Pump Inhibitor Co-Therapy in Patients Taking Aspirin for Secondary Prevention of Ischemic Stroke

BACKGROUND

Low-dose aspirin (ASA) is effective for secondary prevention of ischemic stroke but can increase the risks of hemorrhagic stroke, upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB), and dyspepsia. Prophylactic administration of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) reduces the risks of these digestive symptoms. We investigated the cost effectiveness of adding a PPI to ASA therapy for ischemic stroke patients in Japan.

METHODS

A Markov state-transition model was developed to compare the cost effectiveness of ASA monotherapy with ASA plus PPI co-therapy in patients with histories of upper gastrointestinal ulcers and ischemic stroke. The model takes into account ASA adherence rate and adverse effects due to ASA, including hemorrhagic stroke and UGIB. The analysis was performed from the perspective of healthcare payers in 2013.

RESULTS

In the base case, total life-years by PPI co-therapy and monotherapy were 16.005 and 15.932, respectively. The difference in duration of no therapy (no ASA or PPI) between the therapies was 558.5 days, which would prevent 30.3 recurrences of ischemic stroke per 1000 person-years. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of PPI co-therapy relative to monotherapy was ¥1,191,665 (US$11,458) per life-year gained. In a one-way sensitivity analysis, PPI co-therapy was consistently cost effective at a willingness to pay of ¥5,000,000 (US$48,077) per life-year gained. In a probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the probability that PPI co-therapy was cost effective was 89.74% at the willingness to pay.

CONCLUSIONS

Co-therapy with ASA plus PPI appears to be cost-effective compared with ASA monotherapy. The addition of PPI also appeared to prolong the duration of ASA therapy, thereby reducing the risk of ischemic stroke.

The changing patterns of dispensing branded and generic drugs for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease between 2006 and 2011 in Japan: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Despite rising healthcare costs, generic drugs are less frequently dispensed in Japan compared with other developed countries. This study aimed to describe changes in dispensing of branded and generic drugs and to explore possible factors that promote the use of generic drugs.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using a Japanese medical and pharmacy claims database. All proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine H2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) with indications for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) described on Japanese labels were included. Patterns of dispensing branded and generic drugs for the treatment of GERD between 2006 and 2011 were analyzed. Multivariate logistic regression was applied to investigate factors associated with receiving generic drugs.

RESULTS

The study cohort included 14,590 patients (male: 50.2%, mean age: 43.1 years). Branded drugs for GERD were still frequently dispensed despite an increase in the share of generic drugs. Only 4.3% of patients who initially received branded drugs switched to generic drugs. The percentage of patients who received only generic drugs increased over time (6.5% to 22.1%). The frequency of generic drug dispensing was the highest in the setting where both prescription and dispensing were implemented in clinics (43.3%), while the lowest in the setting where both prescription and dispensing were implemented in hospitals (11.5%). Factors associated with receiving generic drugs included year of dispensing (adjusted OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.94 to 2.55 for 2009-11 v 2006-8), prescription and dispensing setting (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.26 for prescription in hospitals and dispensing in community pharmacies; OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.80 to 2.72 for prescription in clinics and dispensing in community pharmacies; and OR 4.55, 95% CI 3.68 to 5.62 for prescription and dispensing in clinics v prescription and dispensing in hospitals) and H2RAs (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.49 to 1.81 compared to PPIs).

CONCLUSIONS

The share of generic drugs for the treatment of GERD increased over time although branded drugs for GERD were still dispensed frequently. The use of generic drugs for GERD was influenced not only by government policies but also by changes in treatment approach and the setting of prescription and dispensing.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of celecoxib compared with diclofenac in the treatment of pain in osteoarthritis (OA) within the Swedish health system using an adaptation of the NICE OA model

OBJECTIVES

Celecoxib for the treatment of pain resulting from osteoarthritis (OA) was reviewed by the Tandvårds- och läkemedelsförmånsverket-Dental and Pharmaceutical Benefits Board (TLV) in Sweden in late 2010. This study aimed to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of celecoxib plus a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) compared to diclofenac plus a PPI in a Swedish setting.

METHODS

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the UK developed a health economic model as part of their 2008 assessment of treatments for OA. In this analysis, the model was reconstructed and adapted to a Swedish perspective. Drug costs were updated using the TLV database. Adverse event costs were calculated using the regional price list of Southern Sweden and the standard treatment guidelines from the county council of Stockholm. Costs for treating cardiovascular (CV) events were taken from the Swedish DRG codes and the literature.

RESULTS

Over a patient's lifetime treatment with celecoxib plus a PPI was associated with a quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gain of 0.006 per patient when compared to diclofenac plus a PPI. There was an increase in discounted costs of 529 kr per patient, which resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 82,313 kr ($12,141). Sensitivity analysis showed that treatment was more cost effective in patients with an increased risk of bleeding or gastrointestinal (GI) complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that celecoxib plus a PPI is a cost effective treatment for OA when compared to diclofenac plus a PPI. Treatment is shown to be more cost effective in Sweden for patients with a high risk of bleeding or GI complications. It was in this population that the TLV gave a positive recommendation. There are known limitations on efficacy in the original NICE model.

Helicobacter pylori eradication in West Asia: A review

The efficacy of first- and second-line Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) eradication regimens varies considerably in West Asian countries, mainly due to the variable prevalence of resistant organisms. However, no review article has yet evaluated and compared the efficacy of different regimens among different countries of this region. Therefore, we conducted a review to select the best options and provide recommendations for H. pylori treatment in this geographic region. A search through PubMed was carried out to obtain relevant randomized clinical trials published in English language up to June 2013. According to the results, among different therapeutic regimens used as the first-line protocols, 10-d Bismuth-Furazolidone/Metronidazole quadruple therapy, 14-d Clarithromycin-containing hybrid therapy and 14-d quadruple therapy including a proton pump inhibitor + Bismuth + Tetracycline (500 mg QID) + Metronidazole (500 mg TDS) seemed to be appropriate options. Among second-line therapeutic regimens, Bismuth-based quadruple therapies containing Tetracycline and Furazolidone/Metronidazole, triple therapy containing Amoxicillin and Gatifloxacin and Quadruple therapy including Bismuth + Azithromycin and Ofloxacin seemed to be effective options. Third-line therapies were not evaluated in West Asia; most guidelines, however, recommend choosing optimal eradication regimen according to the pattern of antibiotic susceptibility of H. pylori. Although we limited our investigation to H. pylori eradication regimens in West Asia, the clinical significance of the results goes beyond the countries situated in this geographic region. In fact, the results are transferrable to any region as long as the patterns of resistance are the same.

Economic evaluations of gastroesophageal reflux disease medical management

BACKGROUND

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) contributes to substantial medication use and costs worldwide. Economic evaluations provide insight into the value of healthcare, taking into account cost, quality, and benefits of particular treatments.

OBJECTIVES

Our objectives were to systematically review the existing literature to identify economic evaluations of GERD management strategies, to assess the scientific quality of these reports, and to summarize the economic outcomes of these evaluations.

METHODS

We identified economic evaluations and cost studies of GERD management strategies by searching PubMed and the UK NHS Economic Evaluation Database via the Cochrane Library. Searching was restricted to articles in English-language journals from July 2003 to July 2013. Cost-identification articles were excluded from the final analysis.

RESULTS

Eighteen articles were included in the final analysis; 61 % of these met all criteria for quality reporting. Overall, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy was preferred (most effective and least costly) as empiric therapy for patients with reflux symptoms, except in patient populations with high Helicobacter pylori prevalence (>40 %). Initial empiric PPI therapy (vs. initial endoscopy stratification or H. pylori testing) is likely the most cost-effective initial strategy for patients with typical GERD symptoms. Surgery may be cost effective in patients with chronic GERD symptoms at time horizons of 3-10 years. Endoscopic anti-reflux procedures were not cost effective based on available data.

CONCLUSIONS

Further economic evaluations should adhere to standard reporting measures of cost estimates and outcomes, and should attempt to account for and compare the large heterogeneity of patient phenotypes and treatment effects seen with anti-reflux therapies.

Yields of dual therapy containing high-dose proton pump inhibitor in eradication of H. pylori positive dyspeptic patients

BACKGROUND/AIMs: H. pylori eradication has been recommended for dyspeptic patients in high prevalance regions. Triple therapies are still prescribed mostly because culture and antibiotic susceptibility tests aren’t widely available in the world. Dual therapy with high-dose proton pump inhibitors reported to have higher eradication rates. Our objective was to determine eradication success and cost-effectivity of dual therapy in dyspeptic patients.

METHODOLOGY

Patients were treated orally with either dual (n:74,omeprazole 20mg q.i.d and amoxicillin 1g b.i.d) or triple therapy (n:116,omeprazole 20mg b.i.d and amoxicillin 1g b.i.d and clarithromycin 500mg b.i.d) for 14 days. HpSA was requested 3 months later. The results were evaluated statistically, p values ˂0,05 were considered significant.

RESULTS

Patients (n:190) were included the study((80 female,110 male, mean age: 35.6±11year(p<0.001)). Alcohol/smoking, endoscopic findings and H. pylori rates with pathological examinations were not significantly different between groups whereas there was a significant difference in HpFast tests(p<0.01). When examined with HpSA tests 3 months after the treatment, eradication rate was 81.1% in the dual therapy group versus 63.8% in the triple therapy group (p:0.011). Dual therapy was economic than triple therapy (144USDvs.107USD,p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Dual therapy seems more successful, cost-effective and is less risky in terms of side effects compared to standard triple therapy in patients with dyspepsia.

Cost-effectiveness of chemoprevention with proton pump inhibitors in Barrett's esophagus

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) may reduce the risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) in patients with Barrett's esophagus. PPIs are prescribed for virtually all patients with Barrett's esophagus, irrespective of the presence of reflux symptoms, and represent a de facto chemopreventive agent in this population. However, long-term PPI use has been associated with several adverse effects, and the cost-effectiveness of chemoprevention with PPIs has not been evaluated.

AIM

The purpose of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of PPIs for the prevention of EAC in Barrett's esophagus without reflux.

METHODS

We designed a state-transition Markov microsimulation model of a hypothetical cohort of 50-year-old white men with Barrett's esophagus. We modeled chemoprevention with PPIs or no chemoprevention, with endoscopic surveillance for all treatment arms. Outcome measures were life-years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), incident EAC cases and deaths, costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.

RESULTS

Assuming 50% reduction in EAC, chemoprevention with PPIs was a cost-effective strategy compared to no chemoprevention. In our model, administration of PPIs cost $23,000 per patient and resulted in a gain of 0.32 QALYs for an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $12,000/QALY. In sensitivity analyses, PPIs would be cost-effective at $50,000/QALY if they reduce EAC risk by at least 19%.

CONCLUSIONS

Chemoprevention with PPIs in patients with Barrett's esophagus without reflux is cost-effective if PPIs reduce EAC by a minimum of 19%. The identification of subgroups of Barrett's esophagus patients at increased risk for progression would lead to more cost-effective strategies for the prevention of esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Therapeutic substitution post-patent expiry: the cases of ACE inhibitors and proton pump inhibitors

This paper examines whether there is a switch in total (originator and generic) consumption after generic entry from molecules that face generic competition towards other molecules of the same class, which are still in-patent. Data from six European countries for the time period 1991 to 2006 are used to study the cases of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and proton pump inhibitors. Empirical evidence shows that patent expiry of captopril and enalapril led to a switch in total (off-patent originator and generic) consumption towards other in-patent angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, whereas patent expiry of omeprazole led to a switch in consumption towards other proton pump inhibitors. This phenomenon makes generic policies ineffective and results in an increase in pharmaceutical expenditure due to the absence of generic alternatives in the market of in-patent molecules.

Assessing the chiral switch: approval and use of single-enantiomer drugs, 2001 to 2011

OBJECTIVES

A "chiral switch" occurs in the pharmaceutical market when a drug made up of 2 enantiomer forms is replaced with a purified single-enantiomer version, often in the context of a patent expiration. We studied the prevalence of chiral switching in the United States over the past decade, including trends in use of, and expenditures on, these products in Medicaid.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective analysis.

METHODS

We used US Adopted Names prefixes (lev/levo/ar/es/dex/dextro) to identify all single-enantiomer drugs approved from 2001 to 2011. From publicly available US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval documents, we extracted the characteristics of the pivotal premarket trials for the single enantiomers. Specifically, we evaluated whether the single enantiomer was directly compared with the precursor racemic drug and whether there was evidence of superior efficacy. We used quarterly drug expenditure data from each state Medicaid program to chart trends in use of, and spending on, the single-enantiomer products and their racemic precursors during the study period.

RESULTS

From 2001 to 2011, the FDA approved 9 single-enantiomer products: dexlansoprazole, levoleucovorin, levocetirizine, armodafinil, arformoterol, eszopiclone, escitalopram, dexmethylphenidate, and esomeprazole. Of those 9 drugs, 3 had at least 1 pre-approval randomized trial that included the racemic precursor as a direct comparator, but there was no evidence of superiority of the single enantiomer over the racemic at comparable doses. Between 2001 and 2011, US Medicaid programs spent approximately $6.3 billion on these 9 single-enantiomer drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

Recently approved single-enantiomer drugs showed no evidence of superior efficacy over the older racemic precursors in the pivotal trials leading to their approval, and in a majority of cases, they were not directly compared.

Use of proton pump inhibitors for the provision of stress ulcer prophylaxis: clinical and economic consequences

The provision of stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) for the prevention of clinically significant bleeding is widely recognized as a crucial component of care in critically ill patients. Nevertheless, SUP is often provided to non-critically ill patients despite a risk for clinically significant bleeding of roughly 0.1 %. The overuse of SUP therefore introduces added risks for adverse drug events and cost, with minimal expected benefit in clinical outcome. Historically, histamine-2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) have been the preferred agent for SUP; however, recent data have revealed proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) as the most common modality (76 %). There are no high quality randomized controlled trials demonstrating superiority with PPIs compared with H2RAs for the prevention of clinically significant bleeding associated with stress ulcers. In contrast, PPIs have recently been linked to several adverse effects including Clostridium difficile diarrhea and pneumonia. These complications have substantial economic consequences and have a marked impact on the overall cost effectiveness of PPI therapy. Nevertheless, PPI use remains widespread in patients who are at both high and low risk for clinically significant bleeding. This article will describe the utilization of PPIs for SUP and present the clinical and economic consequences linked to their use/overuse.

Proton pump inhibitor prescribing and costs in a large outpatient clinic

Concerns have been raised regarding potential adverse effects and high costs of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Our objective was to assess issues of PPI utilization and expense in a large outpatient clinic population.

METHODS

Two hundred-fifty-nine outpatient records were reviewed regarding PPI prescribing and indications during 2009. A cost analysis was performed to project cost differences if histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) were used as an alternative to PPIs in appropriate clinical situations.

RESULTS

Eighty-three (32.0%) were taking PPIs. Problem-listed gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) was the primary diagnosis in 69 (83.1%) of patients on PPIs. GERD was not apparent by documented history and/or endoscopy in 46.3% of problem-listed GERD patients. Symptom severity had been documented in only 36.2%. Cost analysis projected substantial savings if H2RAs had been used initially for mild to moderate symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient PPI prescribing indications are not well documented and PPI use is probably excessive. H2RA therapy is likely underutilized.

Photodynamic therapy vs radiofrequency ablation for Barrett's dysplasia: efficacy, safety and cost-comparison

AIM

To compare effectiveness, safety, and cost of photodynamic therapy (PDT) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in treatment of Barrett's dysplasia (BD).

METHODS

Consecutive case series of patients undergoing either PDT or RFA treatment at single center by a single investigator were compared. Thirty-three patients with high-grade dysplasia (HGD) had treatment with porfimer sodium photosensitzer and 630 nm laser (130 J/cm), with maximum of 3 treatment sessions. Fifty-three patients with BD (47 with low-grade dysplasia -LGD, 6 with HGD) had step-wise circumferential and focal ablation using the HALO system with maximum of 4 treatment sessions. Both groups received proton pump inhibitors twice daily. Endoscopic biopsies were acquired at 2 and 12 mo after enrollment, with 4-quadrant biopsies every 1 cm of the original BE extent. A complete histological resolution response of BD (CR-D) was defined as all biopsies at the last endoscopy session negative for BD. Fisher's exact test was used to assess differences between the two study groups for primary outcomes. For all outcomes, a two-sided P value of less than 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.

RESULTS

Thirty (91%) PDT patients and 39 (74%) RFA were men (P = 0.05). The mean age was 70.7 ± 12.2 and 65.4 ± 12.7 (P = 0.10) year and mean length of BE was 5.4 ± 3.2 cm and 5.7 ± 3.2 cm (P = 0.53) for PDT and RFA patients, respectively. The CR-D was (18/33) 54.5% with PDT vs (47/53) 88.7% with RFA (P = 0.001). One patient with PDT had an esophageal perforation and was managed with non-surgical measures and no perforation was seen with RFA. PDT was five times more costly than RFA at our institution. The two groups were not randomized and had different BD grading are the limitations of the study.

CONCLUSION

In our experience, RFA had higher rate of CR-D without any serious adverse events and was less costly than PDT for endoscopic treatment of BD.

Private expenditures on brand name prescription drugs after generic entry

BACKGROUND

Generic drugs offer a less expensive and therapeutically equivalent alternative to brand name drugs. Nevertheless, many Canadian private drug plans continue to pay for brand name drugs even after generics become available.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to quantify the excess spending resulting from this practice.

METHODS

We used the IMS Brogan PharmaStat database to study private-plan drug spending in Ontario from 2000 to 2009. We focused on three widely used drug classes: proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. For each specific molecule, we determined the difference between what private plans spent on the brand name version and what would have been spent if an available generic version of the same molecule had been purchased instead.

RESULTS

We found that prescriptions paid for by private drug plans were often filled with brand name drugs after generics became available. This led to excess private spending of more than Can$107.8 million for these three drug classes over our study period: Can$54.4 million for PPIs, Can$32.4 million for SSRIs and Can$21.0 million for ACE inhibitors.

INTERPRETATION

Brand name drugs continue to be reimbursed by Canadian private drug plans at higher prices even after less expensive generic alternatives are available. By mandating generic substitution, substantial cost savings on benefit plans could be achieved.

Evolutions in both co-payment and generic market share for common medication in the Belgian reference pricing system

BACKGROUND

In Belgium, a co-insurance system is applied in which patients pay a portion of the cost for medicines, called co-payment. Co-payment is intended to make pharmaceutical consumers more responsible, increase solidarity, and avoid or reduce moral hazards.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to study the possible influence of co-payment on sales volume and generic market share in two commonly used medicine groups: cholesterol-lowering medication [statins (HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors) and fibrates] and acid-blocking agents (proton pump inhibitors and histamine H2 receptor antagonists).

METHODS AND DATA

The data were extracted from the Pharmanet database, which covers pharmaceutical consumption in all Belgian ambulatory pharmacies. First, the proportion of sales volume and costs of generic products were modelled over time for the two medicine groups. Second, we investigated the relation between co-payment and contribution by the national insurance agency using change-point linear mixed models.

RESULTS

The change-point analysis suggested several influential events. First, the generic market share in total sales volume was negatively influenced by the abolishment of the distinction in the maximum co-payment level for name brands and generics in 2001. Second, relaxation of the reimbursement conditions for generic omeprazole stimulated generic sales volume in 2004. Finally, an increase in co-payment for generic omeprazole was associated with a significant decrease in omeprazole sales volume in 2005. The observational analysis demonstrated several changes over time. First, the co-payment amounts for name-brand and generic drugs converged in the observed time period for both medicine groups under study. Second, the proportion of co-payment for the total cost of simvastatin and omeprazole increased over time for small packages, and more so for generic than for name-brand products. For omeprazole, both the proportion and the amount of co-payment increased over time. Third, over time the prescription of small packages shifted to an emphasis on larger packages.

CONCLUSIONS

As maximum co-payment levels decreased over time, they overruled the reference pricing system in Belgium. The changes in co-payment share over time also significantly affected sales volume, but whether physicians or patients are the decisive actors on the demand side of pharmaceutical consumption remains unclear.

Gastroprotective strategies in chronic NSAID users: a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing single-tablet formulations with individual components

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of competing gastroprotective strategies, including single-tablet formulations, in the prevention of gastrointestinal (GI) complications in patients with chronic arthritis taking nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).

METHODS

We performed a cost-utility analysis to compare eight gastroprotective strategies including NSAIDs, cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), histamine-2 receptor antagonists, misoprostol, and single-tablet formulations. We derived estimates for outcomes and costs from medical literature. The primary outcome was incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained. We performed sensitivity analyses to assess the effect of GI complications, compliance rates, and drug costs.

RESULTS

For average-risk patients, NSAID + PPI cotherapy was most cost-effective. The NSAID/PPI single-tablet formulation became cost-effective only when its price decreased from €0.78 to €0.56 per tablet, or when PPI compliance fell below 51% in the NSAID + PPI strategy. All other strategies were more costly and less effective. The model was highly sensitive to the GI complication risk, costs of PPI and NSAID/PPI single-tablet formulation, and compliance to PPI. In patients with a threefold higher risk of GI complications, both NSAID + PPI cotherapy and single-tablet formulation were cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

NSAID + PPI cotherapy is the most cost-effective strategy in all patients with chronic arthritis irrespective of their risk for GI complications. For patients with increased GI risk, the NSAID/PPI single-tablet formulation is also cost-effective.

Impact of clinical pharmacists' recommendations on a proton pump inhibitor taper protocol in an ambulatory care practice

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have demonstrated an association between chronic proton pump inhibitor (PPI) utilization and adverse events such as fractures, infections, hypomagnesemia, and vitamin B12 deficiency. Because patients taking PPIs for an extended period of time are more susceptible to these adverse events, an approach to tapering patients off PPIs is clinically warranted.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of clinical pharmacists' recommendations to clinicians to decrease PPI use in patients when chronic therapy is not indicated.

METHODS

Clinical pharmacists electronically sent PPI taper recommendations for qualifying patients to primary care providers the day before each patient's appointment. Using insurance claims data, an average pills per month (PPM) count was calculated for the 5-month period prior to initiating the PPI taper as well as for the 5-month period after the date of taper initiation. The PPM count was calculated by dividing the total number of pills a patient received by the total number of days in that period, multiplied by 30. The primary outcome for the study was the change in average PPM count from baseline (pretaper period) to follow-up (posttaper period) and was assessed using a paired t-test. Secondary outcomes included change in total annualized PPI costs to the organization, proportion of patients who began the taper protocol after primary care provider recommendation, and whether baseline characteristics were predictors of successful response. Change in annualized PPI costs to the organization was calculated by multiplying the average unit cost per pill (determined using a weighted average of the average wholesale price of the individual drugs) by the PPM change seen with the primary outcome and by the number of patients included in the study and expressed over the period of a full year. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine whether baseline variables including alcohol and tobacco use, diagnosis related to PPI use, PPI dose, dosing frequency, gender, and length of prior PPI use significantly impacted successful tapering.

RESULTS

Average PPM count decreased by 8.7 pills (95% CI: 6.4, 11.1), from 25.6 at baseline (95% CI: 23.1, 28.1) to 16.9 at follow-up (95% CI: 14.3, 19.5; P less than 0.001). For the 117 evaluable patients in the study, there was an annualized PPI cost reduction of $18,151. 37.6% (44/117) of pharmacist-recommended tapers were enacted upon by primary care providers at the patient visit. Baseline patient characteristics were not found to be predictors of a successful taper response.

CONCLUSION

Clinical pharmacist intervention may decrease overutilization of PPIs and associated costs in the primary care setting. While a decrease in PPI use was observed in this study, these findings do not imply improvement in clinically meaningful patient outcomes.

Cost-effectiveness analysis: stress ulcer bleeding prophylaxis with proton pump inhibitors, H2 receptor antagonists

OBJECTIVES

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and H2-receptor antagonists (H2RAs) present varying pharmacological efficacy in preventing stress ulcer bleeding (SUB) in intensive care units. The literature also reports disparate rates of ventilator-assisted pneumonia (VAP) as side effects of these treatments. We compared the cost-effectiveness of these two prophylactic pharmacological options.

METHODS

We constructed a decision tree with a 60-day time horizon for patients at high risk for developing SUB, receiving either PPIs or H2RAs. For each treatment strategy, patients could be in one of three states of health: SUB, VAP, or no complication. Contemporary, clinically relevant probabilities were obtained from a broad literature search. Costs were estimated by using a representative US countrywide database. A third-party payer perspective was adopted. Cost-effectiveness and univariate and multivariate sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Probabilities of SUB and VAP were 1.3% and 10.3% for PPIs versus 6.6% and 10.3% for H2RAs, respectively. Lengths of stay and per diem costs were 24 days and US $2764 for SUB, 42 days and US $3310 for VAP, and 14 days and US $2993 for patients without complications. Average costs per no complication were US $58,700 for PPIs and US $63,920 for H2RAs. The H2RA strategy was dominated by PPIs. Sensitivity analysis showed that these findings were sensitive to VAP rates but PPIs remain cost-effective. The acceptability curve shows the stability of the probabilistic results according to varying willingness-to-pay values.

CONCLUSION

PPI prophylaxis is the most efficient prophylactic strategy in patients at high risk of developing SUB when compared with using H2RAs.

Proton pump inhibitors: potential cost reductions by applying prescribing guidelines

BACKGROUND

There are concerns that proton pump inhibitors (PPI) are being over prescribed in both primary and secondary care. This study aims to establish potential cost savings in a community drug scheme for a one year period according to published clinical and cost-effective guidelines for PPI prescribing.

METHODS

Retrospective population-based cohort study in the Republic of Ireland using the Health Services Executive (HSE) Primary Care Reimbursement Services (PCRS) pharmacy claims database. The HSE-PCRS scheme is means tested and provides free health care including medications to approximately 30% of the Irish population. Prescription items are WHO ATC coded and details of every drug dispensed and claimants' demographic data are available. Potential cost savings (net ingredient cost) were estimated according to UK NICE clinical guidelines for all HSE-PCRS claimants on PPI therapy for ≥3 consecutive months starting in 2007 with a one year follow up (n=167,747). Five scenarios were evaluated; (i) change to PPI initiation (cheapest brand); and after 3 months (ii) therapeutic switching (cheaper brand/generic equivalent); (iii) dose reduction (maintenance therapy); (iv) therapeutic switching and dose reduction and (v) therapeutic substitution (H2 antagonist).

RESULTS

Total net ingredient cost was €88,153,174 for claimants on PPI therapy during 2007. The estimated costing savings for each of the five scenarios in a one year period were: (i) €36,943,348 (42% reduction); (ii) €29,568,475 (34%); (iii) €21,289,322 (24%); (iv) €40,505,013 (46%); (v) €34,991,569 (40%).

CONCLUSION

There are opportunities for substantial cost savings in relation to PPI prescribing if implementation of clinical guidelines in terms of generic substitution and step-down therapy is implemented on a national basis.

Analysis of nonformulary use of PPIs and excess drug cost in a Veterans Affairs population

BACKGROUND

In the Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system, a formulary-based approach without beneficiary cost-share incentives is used to limit the pharmacy cost of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). However, the effectiveness of this approach in reducing the cost of PPIs is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To (a) compare cost differences between the formulary PPI (generic omeprazole) and nonformulary PPIs and (b) evaluate reasons for nonformulary PPI use in order to identify opportunities to increase formulary drug use and discourage unnecessary use of nonformulary PPIs.

METHODS

A list of patients with receipt of PPIs from July 1, 2008, through June 30, 2009, was obtained from the Loma Linda VA Healthcare System pharmacy. Subjects with receipt of at least 120 units (capsules or tablets) of any PPI in the study period were considered long-term users. Demographic information was collected. Pharmacy consult records were reviewed to identify reasons for nonformulary use and dosing regimen of the formulary PPI prior to the switch. Cost analysis was done based on the VA contract prices for the drugs at the time of the study.

RESULTS

Of 58,605 unique patients seen in this VA health care system in the 12-month period from July 1, 2008, through June 30, 2009, 13,713 (23.4%) received a PPI, and of these, 10,483 (76.4%) received at least 120 PPI units and were defined as long-term users. Of the long-term users, 9,462 (90.3%) were on the formulary PPI generic omeprazole, and 1,021 were nonformulary PPI users. Use of nonformulary PPIs (esomeprazole, pantoprazole, lansoprazole, rabeprazole) accounted for 10.5% of the PPI units and 9.7% of the users but 57.3% of total PPI cost. This pattern resulted in $570,263 in excess spending (i.e., $570,263 would have been saved in the study period if the nonformulary PPI users had used the formulary drug). The most common reason for nonformulary long-term PPI use was persistent symptoms (n=901, 88.2%). Adverse reaction was cited by 111 (10.9%) of nonformulary PPI users, 33.3% (n=37) of whom reported diarrhea. Of those who switched to a nonformulary PPI due to persistent symptoms, 363 (40.3%) were on once-daily dosing prior to the switch; 379 (42.1%) were on twice-daily dosing; and 159 (17.6%) were transfers from other places in which prior dosing information was not available in the hospital pharmacy records.

CONCLUSIONS

One-year PPI use prevalence was 23% in this VA population, and long-term use prevalence was 18%. Nonformulary PPI use accounted for 10.5% of the PPI units and 9.7% of the users but 57.3% of total PPI drug cost. Opportunities to reduce nonformulary PPI use in order to reduce overall expenditures on PPIs include verification of optimal formulary PPI use, titration to twice-daily dosing, and confirmation of adverse reaction as being attributable to PPI use.

Five-year examination of utilization and drug cost outcomes associated with benefit design changes including reference pricing for proton pump inhibitors in a state employee health plan

BACKGROUND

The Arkansas State Employee Benefits Division (EBD) is a self-insured program comprising public school and other state employees, their spouses, and dependents. Previous research published in JMCP (2006) showed drug cost savings of $2.20 per member per month (PMPM; 37.6%) or annualized savings of $3.4 million associated with a benefit design change and coverage of the proton pump inhibitor (PPI) omeprazole over-the-counter (OTC) beginning in March 2004. On May 1, 2005, brand esomeprazole was excluded from coverage, with current users grandfathered for 4 months until September 2005. Reference pricing for PPIs, including esomeprazole but excluding generic omeprazole, was implemented on September 1, 2005, and the beneficiary cost share for all PPIs except generic omeprazole was determined from comparison of the PPI actual price to the $0.90 omeprazole OTC reference price per unit.

OBJECTIVE

To examine PPI utilization and drug costs before and after (a) excluding esomeprazole from coverage (with grandfathering current users) and (b) implementing a therapeutic maximum allowable cost (TMAC), or reference-pricing benefit design, for the PPI class in a large state employee health plan with fairly stable enrollment of approximately 127,500 members in 2005 through 2008 and approximately 128,000 members in 2009 Q1.

METHODS

The pharmacy claims database for the EBD was used to examine utilization and cost data for PPIs in a longitudinal analysis for the 61-month period from March 1, 2004, through March 31, 2009. Pharmacy claims data were compared for the period 14 months prior to esomeprazole exclusion (preperiod), 4 months during the esomeprazole exclusion (postperiod 1), and the ensuing 43 months of PPI reference pricing (postperiod 2). PPI cost and utilization data for the intervention group of approximately 127,500 beneficiaries were compared with a group of 122 self-insured employers with a total of nearly 1 million beneficiaries whose pharmacy benefits did not include reference pricing for PPIs.

RESULTS

Despite 79% of existing esomeprazole users being grandfathered during the 4-month esomeprazole-exclusion period (postperiod 1), the share of omeprazole OTC claims increased from 35.2% to 42.5% (+ 7.3 percentage points) of all PPI claims, and esomeprazole claims decreased from 16.7% to 12.0% (-4.7 percentage points), with little change in the use of other PPIs. The average allowed charge (price) per day of PPI drug therapy decreased in postperiod 1 by 8.9% from $2.81 to $2.56, while utilization increased by 2.2% from 1.83 days PMPM to 1.87 days PMPM; the net plan cost PMPM decreased by $0.40 PMPM from $3.78 to $3.38 (-10.6%), representing a reduction in spending of $35,664 per month while the average member copayment per claim was essentially unchanged. In the 43 months of reference pricing in postperiod 2, PPI utilization was essentially unchanged at 1.82 days PMPM compared with the preperiod (1.83 days PMPM) and 2.7% lower than the esomeprazole-exclusion period (1.87 days PMPM); however, price (charge per day) decreased by 38.4% during refer- RESEARCH ence pricing to $1.73 from $2.81 in the preperiod and by 32.4% compared with $2.56 in the esomeprazole-exclusion period, despite an increase in the average pharmacy dispensing fee to $5.21 per PPI claim. Net plan cost decreased by $1.87 PMPM (49.5%) to $1.91 PMPM during reference pricing compared with the preperiod ($3.78 PMPM) and by $1.47 PMPM (43.5%) compared with the esomeprazole-exclusion period 1 ($3.38 PMPM). Beneficiary costs (copayment per claim) for PPIs decreased to $1.24 PMPM ($23.27 per claim) compared with the preperiod ($1.37 PMPM, $24.95 per claim) and compared with the esomeprazole-exclusion period ($1.40 PMPM, $25.06 per claim). The reductions in net plan costs represented lower plan spending for the 43 months of reference pricing (postperiod 2) of approximately $9.4 million or an average of approximately $219,500 per month compared with the preperiod or $7.9 million (approximately $183,900 per month) compared with the esomeprazole-exclusion period. Compared with a group of self-insured health plans without pharmacy benefit reference pricing of PPIs, the cost savings over the 43-month period from September 1, 2005, through March 31, 2009, were approximately $7.2 million or $1.31 PMPM.

CONCLUSIONS

For this state employee health plan, the policy change that excluded esomeprazole from coverage but grandfathered current users was associated with a relatively small reduction in PMPM spending on PPIs compared with the subsequent policy change that applied reference pricing to the PPI class based on the price (drug cost plus dispensing fee) for omeprazole OTC. Over 43 months of reference pricing, net plan costs fell dramatically by 49.5% PMPM compared with the preperiod or decreased by 43.5% compared with the esomeprazole-exclusion period. While utilization was essentially unchanged compared with the 18 months before reference pricing, the average pharmacy dispensing fee per PPI claim increased, and beneficiary costs PMPM decreased.

Value of information in the osteoarthritis setting: cost effectiveness of COX-2 selective inhibitors, traditional NSAIDs and proton pump inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Recent National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidance recommended that when traditional NSAIDs or cyclo-oxygenase (COX)-2 selective inhibitors are used by people with osteoarthritis (OA), they should be prescribed along with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI). However, specific recommendations about the type of NSAID or COX-2 could not be made due to high levels of uncertainty in the economic evaluation.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the value of obtaining further evidence to inform the economic evaluation of NSAIDs, COX-2s and PPIs for people with OA.

METHODS

An economic evaluation with an expected value of perfect information (EVPI) analysis was conducted, using a Markov model with data identified from a systematic review. The base-case model used adverse event data from the three largest randomized trials of COX-2 inhibitors, and we repeated the analysis using observational adverse event data. The model was run for a hypothetical population of people with OA, and subgroup analyses were conducted for people with raised gastrointestinal (GI) and cardiovascular (CV) risk. The EVPI was based upon the OA population in England - approximately 2.8 million people. Of these, 50% were assumed to use NSAIDs or COX-2 selective inhibitors for 3 months per year and 56% of these were assumed to be patients with raised GI and CV risk.

RESULTS

The value of further information for this decision problem was very high. Population-level EVPI was £85.1 million in the low-risk group and £179.5 million in the high-risk group (2007-8 values). Expected value of partial perfect information (EVPPI) analysis showed that the groups of parameters for which further evidence was likely to be of most value were CV adverse event risks and all adverse event rates associated with the specific drugs celecoxib and ibuprofen. The value of perfect information remained high even when observational adverse event data were used.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a very high value associated with obtaining further information on uncertain parameters for the economic evaluation of NSAIDs, COX-2 selective inhibitors and PPIs for people with OA. Obtaining further randomized or observational information on CV risks is likely to be particularly cost effective.

Pharmacist and physician satisfaction and rates of switching to preferred medications associated with an instant prior authorization program for proton pump inhibitors in the North Carolina Medicaid program

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the highest expenditure drugs covered by health care plans. During fiscal year 2001-2002, Medicaid programs nationwide spent nearly $2 billion on PPIs. Although the costs of individual PPIs vary widely, there is little variation in therapeutic effectiveness. On June 1, 2007, the North Carolina Medicaid program implemented an "instant approval" option simultaneously with a prior authorization (PA) program for PPIs with the goal of managing costs and maintaining high-quality care. Preferred PPIs included generic omeprazole and Prilosec OTC. This instant approval process (IAP) was expected to impose less administrative burden than is typically associated with PA programs by permitting physician and nonphysician prescribers to either write the PA criteria directly on a prescription form or use "MD Easy," a preprinted form that could be faxed by the prescriber to the dispensing pharmacy. A previous study found that from the prescriber's perspective the IAP reduced practice-related administrative burden and was associated with a reduced gap in PPI therapy when compared with traditional PA.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the acceptability and effectiveness of this IAP for PPIs as assessed by the outcome measures of (a) pharmacist satisfaction with the IAP; (b) physician and pharmacist satisfaction with the MD Easy form; and (c) utilization rates for preferred PPIs, comparing medical practices that used the MD Easy form with practices that did not.

METHODS

A cross-sectional design was used to assess pharmacist and physician satisfaction. A stratified random sample of 240 pharmacies was selected from 1,561 North Carolina pharmacies with claims in the Medicaid claims data file during state fiscal year 2006. Additionally, a stratified random sample of 240 medical practices was selected from 1,045 primary care practices serving Medicaid beneficiaries during 2006. Surveys were administered to pharmacists using either in-person interviews or self-administered questionnaires and to physicians using a mailed questionnaire with follow-up to nonrespondents. An interrupted time series analysis was used to evaluate the effect of the MD Easy form on switching to preferred PPIs using paid Medicaid claims of surveyed practices from calendar year 2007. Practices that reported both using the IAP and receiving the MD Easy form were defined as MD Easy users. Monthly market share data were analyzed using log negative binomial regression models to account for autocorrelation in the time series data.

RESULTS

The pharmacy survey was completed by 202 (84.2%) pharmacies selected for participation. Of 198 permanently employed pharmacists, 140 (70.7%) reported experience with the IAP for PPIs. More than two-thirds (68.6%) of the pharmacist respondents with IAP experience indicated that the IAP is better (34.3%) or much better (34.3%) than traditional PA with RESEARCH respect to overall administrative burden of phone calls, faxes, patient interactions, and doctor contacts. Surveys were completed by 171 (71.3%) of selected physician practices, of which 56 (32.7%) reported experience with the MD Easy forms. Of practices that recalled receiving the MD Easy forms, 52 of 56 (92.9%) reported that the forms "very much" or "somewhat" helped prevent gaps in PPI therapy; 54 of 55 (98.2%) reported that they helped identify patients affected by Medicaid PPI PA; and 100% reported that they helped physicians to follow PA requirements. Immediately after implementation of the IAP and MD Easy form, the observed market share of preferred PPIs increased by 4.1 times (95% CI = 3.57-4.62). From May to June 2007, the preferred PPI market share increased by 64.0 percentage points, from 19.3% to 83.3% (P < 0.001), for practices that reported using the IAP and receiving the MD Easy form (n = 56) and by 55.4 percentage points, from 21.8% to 77.2% (P < 0.001), for practices that either (a) reported not receiving the MD Easy form (n = 25) or (b) reported not using the IAP (n = 84) or (c) did not respond to the survey item asking about the MD Easy form (n = 4). The overall increase in preferred PPI market share after implementation of the IAP was 1.29 times higher for practices that used the MD Easy form than for those that did not based on negative binomial regression modeling; this difference approached statistical significance (95% CI = 1.00-1.68; P = 0.053).

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that an IAP for PPIs using either handwritten prescriptions or a preprinted form is an effective alternative to traditional PA. The IAP was associated with an increase in market share for preferred PPIs and was perceived by pharmacists as less administratively burdensome than traditional PA. Additional studies are needed to determine sustainability and the applicability to other prescription drugs.

Healthcare costs of GERD and acid-related conditions in pediatric patients, with comparison between histamine-2 receptor antagonists and proton pump inhibitors

BACKGROUND

Gastroesophageal reflux disease and acid-related conditions (GERD/ARC) are common in pediatric practice but their costs have not been well characterized.

AIM

To compare healthcare costs (HCC) and healthcare utilization (HCU) of pediatric GERD/ARC between groups of GERD/ARC patients initiated on histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H(2)RAs) or proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and matched controls.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Children (age < 18 years) diagnosed with GERD or ARC (exploratory category) were identified from a large US claims database (1999-2005) using ICD-9 codes. Costs of pediatric GERD/ARC were estimated by comparing 6-month post-diagnosis HCC between cases and matched controls. GERD/ARC-related HCC and HCU for the year 2005 were further compared between GERD/ARC patients initiated with PPIs vs. H(2)RAs in terms of the cost differences relative to pre-initiation (difference-in-difference) and using multivariate regression to adjust for demographics, pre-treatment health status and pre-treatment costs.

RESULTS

A total of 27 865 matched pairs were identified. GERD/ARC patients incurred on average more 6-month total HCC than controls ($2386). In 2005, 1010 pediatric patients were initiated on H(2)RAs or PPIs. About 61% were initiated on PPIs and incurred 1.8 times higher 6-month post-initiation GERD/ARC-related HCC than H(2)RA-initiated patients ($661 vs. $372, p < 0.001). Although total 6-month GERD/ARC-related HCC increased for both PPI- and H(2)RA-treated patients, the increase was 30% less for PPI-treated patients ($173 vs. $246, p = 0.521) in the difference-in-difference analysis and 69% less in the multivariate analysis ($109 vs. $347, p = 0.040).

LIMITATIONS

The use of an exploratory definition for GERD/ARC, administrative claims data and potential coding errors in diagnosis codes used in selection process may limit the generalizability of the results.

CONCLUSION

Pediatric GERD/ARC patients incurred significantly higher healthcare costs compared to similar children without GERD/ARC. Compared to patients initiated with H(2)RAs, patients initiated with PPIs had more baseline comorbidities, and lower GERD/ARC-related HCC after beginning treatment.

Cost effectiveness of COX 2 selective inhibitors and traditional NSAIDs alone or in combination with a proton pump inhibitor for people with osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the cost effectiveness of cyclo-oxygenase-2 (COX 2) selective inhibitors and traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and the addition of proton pump inhibitors to these treatments, for people with osteoarthritis.

DESIGN

An economic evaluation using a Markov model and data from a systematic review was conducted. Estimates of cardiovascular and gastrointestinal adverse events were based on data from three large randomised controlled trials, and observational data were used for sensitivity analyses. Efficacy benefits from treatment were estimated from a meta-analysis of trials reporting total Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) osteoarthritis index score. Other model inputs were obtained from the relevant literature. The model was run for a hypothetical population of people with osteoarthritis. Subgroup analyses were conducted for people at high risk of gastrointestinal or cardiovascular adverse events. Comparators Licensed COX 2 selective inhibitors (celecoxib and etoricoxib) and traditional NSAIDs (diclofenac, ibuprofen, and naproxen) for which suitable data were available were compared. Paracetamol was also included, as was the possibility of adding a proton pump inhibitor (omeprazole) to each treatment.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measure was cost effectiveness, which was based on quality adjusted life years gained. Quality adjusted life year scores were calculated from pooled estimates of efficacy and major adverse events (that is, dyspepsia; symptomatic ulcer; complicated gastrointestinal perforation, ulcer, or bleed; myocardial infarction; stroke; and heart failure).

RESULTS

Addition of a proton pump inhibitor to both COX 2 selective inhibitors and traditional NSAIDs was highly cost effective for all patient groups considered (incremental cost effectiveness ratio less than pound1000 (euro1175, $1650)). This finding was robust across a wide range of effectiveness estimates if the cheapest proton pump inhibitor was used. In our base case analysis, adding a proton pump inhibitor to a COX 2 selective inhibitor (used at the lowest licensed dose) was a cost effective option, even for patients at low risk of gastrointestinal adverse events (incremental cost effectiveness ratio approximately pound10 000). Uncertainties around relative adverse event rates meant relative cost effectiveness for individual COX 2 selective inhibitors and traditional NSAIDs was difficult to determine.

CONCLUSIONS

Prescribing a proton pump inhibitor for people with osteoarthritis who are taking a traditional NSAID or COX 2 selective inhibitor is cost effective. The cost effectiveness analysis was sensitive to adverse event data and the specific choice of COX 2 selective inhibitor or NSAID agent should, therefore, take into account individual cardiovascular and gastrointestinal risks.

Laparoscopic fundoplication compared with medical management for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: cost effectiveness study

OBJECTIVE

To describe the long term costs, health benefits, and cost effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery compared with those of continued medical management for patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD).

DESIGN

We estimated resource use and costs for the first year on the basis of data from the REFLUX trial. A Markov model was used to extrapolate cost and health benefit over a lifetime using data collected in the REFLUX trial and other sources.

PARTICIPANTS

The model compared laparoscopic surgery and continued proton pump inhibitors in male patients aged 45 and stable on GORD medication.

INTERVENTION

Laparoscopic surgery versus continued medical management.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We estimated quality adjusted life years and GORD related costs to the health service over a lifetime. Sensitivity analyses considered other plausible scenarios, in particular size and duration of treatment effect and the GORD symptoms of patients in whom surgery is unsuccessful. Main results The base case model indicated that surgery is likely to be considered cost effective on average with an incremental cost effectiveness ratio of pound2648 (euro3110; US$4385) per quality adjusted life year and that the probability that surgery is cost effective is 0.94 at a threshold incremental cost effectiveness ratio of pound20 000. The results were sensitive to some assumptions within the extrapolation modelling.

CONCLUSION

Surgery seems to be more cost effective on average than medical management in many of the scenarios examined in this study. Surgery might not be cost effective if the treatment effect does not persist over the long term, if patients who return to medical management have poor health related quality of life, or if proton pump inhibitors were cheaper. Further follow-up of patients from the REFLUX trial may be valuable.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN15517081.

What is the best strategy for diagnosis and treatment of Helicobacter pylori in the prevention of recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding? A cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials provide evidence of the high effectiveness of Helicobacter pylori eradication for preventing recurrent ulcer-related gastrointestinal hemorrhage. The best strategy for curing the infection in this setting is, however, still under debate.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate four different strategies for prevention of rebleeding in patients with peptic ulcer hemorrhage: 1) test for H. pylori and treatment, if positive; 2) proton pump inhibitor maintenance; 3) no preventive treatment; 4) empirical H. pylori eradication immediately after bleeding.

METHODS

A decision analysis model was used, with a time horizon of 2 years and a third-party payer perspective. Costs were estimated for two different settings: a low-cost-for-care area (Spain) and a high-cost area (USA). Main outcome measure was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for each upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage avoided.

RESULTS

Empirical H. pylori eradication was the dominant strategy: its estimated rate of recurrent bleeding was lower (6.1%) than those of strategies 1 (7.4%), 2 (11.1%), and 3 (18.4%) and it was the least expensive strategy. The results remained stable when variables were changed inside a wide range of plausible values. Sensitivity analysis also showed that the prevalence of H. pylori in bleeding ulcer was the variable that most influenced the results: when it was below 45% in Spain or below 51% in the United States, empirical eradication was not a dominant strategy although it remained cost-effective.

CONCLUSION

In patients with bleeding peptic ulcer, empirical treatment of H. pylori infection immediately after feeding is restarted is the most cost-effective strategy for preventing recurrent hemorrhage.

Cost analysis of long-term treatment of patients with symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) with esomeprazole on-demand treatment or esomeprazole continuous treatment: an open, randomized, multicenter study in Switzerland

OBJECTIVES

To assess the difference in direct medical costs between on-demand (OD) treatment with esomeprazole (E) 20 mg and continuous (C) treatment with E 20 mg q.d. from a clinical practice view in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms.

METHODS

This open, randomized study (ONE: on-demand Nexium evaluation) compared two long-term management options with E 20 mg in endoscopically uninvestigated patients seeking primary care for GERD symptoms who demonstrated complete relief of symptoms after an initial treatment of 4 weeks with E 40 mg. Data on consumed quantities of all cost items were collected in the study, while data on prices during the time of study were collected separately. The analysis was done from a societal perspective.

RESULTS

Forty-nine percent (484 of 991) of patients randomized to the OD regimen and 46% (420 of 913) of the patients in the C group had at least one contact with the investigator that would have occurred nonprotocol-driven. The difference of the adjusted mean direct medical costs between the treatment groups was CHF 88.72 (95% confidence interval: CHF 41.34-153.95) in favor of the OD treatment strategy (Wilcoxon rank-sum test: P < 0.0001). Adjusted direct nonmedical costs and productivity loss were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The adjusted direct medical costs of a 6-month OD treatment with esomeprazole 20 mg in uninvestigated patients with symptoms of GERD were significantly lower compared with a continuous treatment with E 20 mg once a day. The OD therapy represents a cost-saving alternative to the continuous treatment strategy with E.

Effect and cost-effectiveness of step-up versus step-down treatment with antacids, H2-receptor antagonists, and proton pump inhibitors in patients with new onset dyspepsia (DIAMOND study): a primary-care-based randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Substantial physician workload and high costs are associated with the treatment of dyspepsia in primary health care. Despite the availability of consensus statements and guidelines, the most cost-effective empirical strategy for initial management of the condition remains to be determined. We compared step-up and step-down treatment strategies for initial management of patients with new onset dyspepsia in primary care.

METHODS

Patients aged 18 years and older who consulted with their family doctor for new onset dyspepsia in the Netherlands were eligible for enrolment in this double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Between October, 2003, and January, 2006, 664 patients were randomly assigned to receive stepwise treatment with antacid, H(2)-receptor antagonist, and proton pump inhibitor (step-up; n=341), or these drugs in the reverse order (step-down; n=323), by use of a computer-generated sequence with blocks of six. Each step lasted 4 weeks and treatment only continued with the next step if symptoms persisted or relapsed within 4 weeks. Primary outcomes were symptom relief and cost-effectiveness of initial management at 6 months. Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT); the ITT population consisted of all patients with data for the primary outcome at 6 months. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00247715.

FINDINGS

332 patients in the step-up, and 313 in the step-down group reached an endpoint with sufficient data for evaluation; the main reason for dropout was loss to follow-up. Treatment success after 6 months was achieved in 238 (72%) patients in the step-up group and 219 (70%) patients in the step-down group (odds ratio 0.92, 95% CI 0.7-1.3). The average medical costs were lower for patients in the step-up group than for those in the step-down group (euro228 vs euro245; p=0.0008), which was mainly because of costs of medication. One or more adverse drug events were reported by 94 (28%) patients in the step-up and 93 (29%) patients in the step-down group. All were minor events, including (other) dyspeptic symptoms, diarrhoea, constipation, and bad/dry taste.

INTERPRETATION

Although treatment success with either step-up or step-down treatment is similar, the step-up strategy is more cost effective at 6 months for initial treatment of patients with new onset dyspeptic symptoms in primary care.

Reducing the cost of proton pump inhibitors by adopting best practice

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the appropriateness of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use by assessing the level of compliance of PPI prescribing practices with published guidelines and to assess the potential cost avoidance through inappropriate prescribing.

METHOD

A six-week observational study of PPI prescriptions was undertaken between April and June 2005, involving hospital inpatients who were taking a PPI prior to admission. The patients were evaluated using a standardised questionnaire to obtain information regarding their PPI use and efficacy.

RESULTS

Among the 679 patients admitted during the study period, 133 were receiving a PPI, and of these 97 (50 men and 47 women) were enrolled into the study. The commonest indication for PPI use was gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD, n = 71; 73.2%). In this cohort, more than one-quarter of patients (26.6%) were using greater than the standard PPI dose. Over half of the patients had at least one risk factor known to exacerbate GORD (51.5% were overweight, 46.4% alcohol consumers and 14% current smokers), and 71.1% were receiving medications known to cause or worsen reflux symptoms. Of those patients who reported alarm symptoms, 84% had undergone endoscopy. The overall compliance with the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) prescribing guidelines was 78.4%, with the major reason for non-compliance being use for non-PBS indications. Estimated cost savings through adoption of recommended prescribing practices and the implementation of step-down therapy for GORD patients were up to AUD 90,866 and AUD 118,456 per 100 patient-treatment-years, respectively.

CONCLUSION

PPIs continue to be prescribed outside the treatment guidelines. As a result, opportunities exist to reduce the cost of PPI use through management of contributing factors, adherence to recommended dosage schedules and use of step-down therapy in asymptomatic patients where appropriate.

[Long- and short-term results of staged treatment of ulcer patients working in oil production industry]

AIM

To determine clinical and cost-effect efficacy of staged (hospital-day hospital-outpatient clinic) treatment and rehabilitation of patients with ulcer disease (UD).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Of 160 patients with duodenal ulcer 80 patients (controls) received treatment in hospital and 80 patients (the study group) were treated in hospital and day hospital. Efficacy of the treatment was assessed by clinical data, results of device and cost-effect investigations.

RESULTS

Clinical and endoscopic remission of duodenal ulcer was achieved for the same time in both the groups. The cost of the treatment of 1 patient was 23,393 and 21,163 rub in the controls and in the study group, respectively. Therefore, treatment in a day hospital reduced cost of the treatment. Later, the remission was consolidated by active follow-up in an outpatient clinic.

CONCLUSION

Staged treatment of UD provides good therapeutic and economic effects compared to hospital treatment.

Proton-pump inhibitor utilization associated with the change to nonpreferred formulary status for esomeprazole in the TRICARE formulary

inhibitor (PPI) esomeprazole in the third copayment tier on the TRICARE formulary on July 17, 2005. The change to nonpreferred formulary status for esomeprazole included a $13 copayment increase (from $9.00 to $22.00) for either a 30-day supply purchased from a community pharmacy or a 90-day supply purchased from the mail-order pharmacy and a $0 copayment if obtained from a military pharmacy but with a prior authorization (PA) requirement. The change to nonpreferred formulary status was designed to encourage the use of PPIs other than esomeprazole and to increase the use of the mail-order pharmacy for esomeprazole purchases.

OBJECTIVE

To quantify changes in (a) the TRICARE beneficiary utilization of esomeprazole relative to other PPIs and (b) the pharmacy settings used for filling esomeprazole prescriptions following implementation of a copayment increase and nonpreferred formulary status for esomeprazole.

METHODS

A census of outpatient pharmacy fill records for prescription acid-reducing medications (PPIs, histamine-2 blockers, misoprostol, and sucralfate) obtained by beneficiaries aged 18 years or older from January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2006, was examined. Interrupted time series regression analyses without a control group were used to compare the utilization of esomeprazole relative to other PPIs, as well as the pharmacy setting used to obtain esomeprazole, in the months before and after the formulary change. The rates of continued esomeprazole use, switching to other prescription PPIs (lansoprazole, omeprazole, pantoprazole, and rabeprazole), switching to non-PPI prescription acid-reducing drugs, and discontinued prescription acid-reducing medication use among existing esomeprazole users (i.e., beneficiaries who obtained esomeprazole as the last PPI fill before the formulary change) were calculated overall and for each pharmacy setting used prior to the formulary change.

RESULTS

Over the 24-month study period from January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2006, the total numbers of PPI fills and PPI users increased by 8.5% and 9.0%, respectively, and the number of esomeprazole users decreased by 4.6%. Of esomeprazole users, the percentages of individuals obtaining esomeprazole from military pharmacies and community pharmacies, respectively, decreased from 1.7% to 1.1% and from 89.7% to 81.7%, while the percentage of individuals obtaining esomeprazole from the mail-order pharmacy increased from 8.8% to 17.6%. Time series analysis yielded a positive, statistically significant growth in esomeprazole fills (beta1=0.114; P=0.012) during the 6-month pre-intervention period (January through June 2005) and a significant reduction in August 2005 (beta2=-5.0%; P<0.001), the month immediately following the formulary change. During the 17-month post-intervention period (August 2005 through December 2006), no statistically significant change in trend for esomeprazole fills (beta3=-0.0265; P=0.534) was observed, although a small increase in the raw number of esomeprazole fills was noted. Among the 117,801 existing esomeprazole users, 86,386 (73.3%) continued using esomeprazole, 17,676 (15.0%) switched to other prescription PPIs, 679 (0.6%) used only non- PPI prescription therapy, and 13,060 (11.1%) discontinued all prescription acid-reducing pharmacotherapy after the formulary change. Significantly higher PPI switching and acid-reducing therapy discontinuation rates were observed among men aged 18-44 years and in TRICARE enrollees relative to women, those over 45 years of age, and those who used other health insurance (P<0.001). Individuals who used military pharmacies, where a PA requirement was implemented, were more likely to change pharmacy settings to obtain esomeprazole (43.8%) than were users of community pharmacies (11.9%) or the mail-order pharmacy (22.8%). Mail-order pharmacy users were less likely to discontinue acid-reducing pharmacotherapy (4.9%) than were community (11.9%) or military (12.9%) pharmacy users (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

After adjustment for serial correlation, the formulary change was associated with a migration of approximately 5% of all PPI fills and 25% of esomeprazole fills to the preferred PPIs in the first post-intervention month. Over the 17-month post-intervention period, the trend toward increased esomeprazole use was slowed and use of the mail-order pharmacy for esomeprazole fills nearly doubled. Our observed PPI switch rate of 15.0% resembled the rate observed for another insured population that experienced a similar formulary restructuring, but was substantially lower than the rates reported for more sizeable formulary changes. Thus, the present study's copayment differentials for third-tier medications ($19 compared with tier 1 and $13 compared with tier 2 copayments) may be less than the threshold amount required to optimize switching to preferred PPIs.

Pediatric gastroesophageal reflux disease and acid-related conditions: trends in incidence of diagnosis and acid suppression therapy

OBJECTIVE

To describe the incidence of diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease and acid-related conditions (GERD/ARC) throughout childhood and characterize patterns of diagnosis and treatment with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H(2)RAs).

METHODS

Cohorts of GERD/ARC children (age 0-18 years) were identified from a large US administrative claims database covering 1999-2005 using ICD-9 codes. Incidence, healthcare utilization (HCU), costs, therapy discontinuation and switching rates were compared between various age and patient groups.

RESULTS

Between 2000 and 2005 annual incidence of GERD/ARC diagnosis among infants (age ≤1 year) more than tripled (from 3.4 to 12.3%) and increased by 30% to 50% in other age groups. Patients diagnosed by GI specialists (9.2%) were more likely to be treated with PPIs compared to patients diagnosed by primary care physician (PCP). PPI-initiated patients doubled (from 31.5% in 1999 to 62.6% in 2005) and, when compared with H(2)RA-initiated patients, were associated with 30% less discontinuation and 90% less therapy switching in the first month, and with higher comorbidity burden and pre-treatment total HCU and costs when diagnosed by GI specialists.

LIMITATIONS

The use of an exploratory definition for GERD/ARC, administrative claims data and potential coding errors in diagnosis codes used in selection process may limit the generalizability of the results.

CONCLUSIONS

GERD/ARC incidence increased for children of all ages between 2000 and 2005. PCPs made the majority of diagnoses. PPI initiations have now surpassed H(2)RA initiations.