Economic impact of the clinical benefits of bariatric surgery in diabetes patients with BMI ≥35 kg/m².

The medical costs for a type 2 diabetes patient are two to four times greater than the costs for a patient without diabetes. Bariatric surgery is the most effective weight-loss therapy and has marked therapeutic effects on diabetes. We estimate the economic effect of the clinical benefits of bariatric surgery for diabetes patients with BMI ≥ 35 kg/m². Using an administrative claims database of privately insured patients covering 8.5 million lives 1999-2007, we identify obese patients with diabetes, aged 18-65 years, who were treated with bariatric surgery identified using Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System codes. These patients were matched with nonsurgery control patients on demographic factors, comorbidities, and health-care costs. The overall return on investment (RoI) associated with bariatric surgery was calculated using multivariate analysis. Surgery and control patients were compared postindex with respect to diagnostic claims for diabetes, diabetes medication claims, and adjusted diabetes medication and supply costs. Surgery costs were fully recovered after 26 months for laparoscopic surgery. At month 6, 28% of surgery patients had a diabetes diagnosis, compared to 74% of control patients (P < 0.001). Among preindex insulin users, insulin use dropped to 43% by month 3 for surgery patients, vs. 84% for controls (P < 0.001). By month 1, medication and supply costs were significantly lower for surgery patients (P < 0.001). The therapeutic benefits of bariatric surgery on diabetes translate into considerable economic benefits. These data suggest that surgical therapy is clinically more effective and ultimately less expensive than standard therapy for diabetes patients with BMI ≥ 35 kg/m².

Assessing the relationship between compliance with antidepressant therapy and employer costs among employees in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To assess effects of antidepressant treatment compliance on health care and workplace costs. METHODS: By using workplace survey data linked to two employers' health care claims, employees with depression/antidepressant claims were categorized into noncompliant/compliant groups. Annualized costs were compared between compliance groups, for the employees with antidepressant use and a subset diagnosed with depression. RESULTS: Among antidepressant users (N = 1224), medical costs were not statistically different for compliant versus noncompliant patients; drug costs were higher for compliant patients, primarily because of antidepressants' costs. Similar associations were observed among depressed patients (N = 488). Absenteeism costs were lower for compliant patients with antidepressant use ($3857 vs $4,907, P = 0.041) and among depressed patients ($3976 vs $5899, P = 0.047). Presenteeism costs were higher for depressed compliant patients ($19,170 vs $15,829, P = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Increased compliance with antidepressants is significantly associated with reduced absenteeism costs.

The economic implications of generic substitution of antiepileptic drugs: a review of recent evidence.

BACKGROUND: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) considers generic and branded drugs to be therapeutically equivalent if they are pharmaceutically equivalent and bioequivalent. The American Academy of Neurology (AAN) disagrees and opposes generic substitution of branded antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) without physician and patient approval due to the risk of loss of seizure control. OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence to date surrounding the economic impact of brand-to-generic substitutions of AEDs. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed and MEDLINE was conducted; the bibliographies of key articles obtained from the search were used to identify additional sources. RESULTS/CONCLUSION: Current literature suggests statistically higher overall healthcare costs during periods of generic AED use than during periods when branded AED are used, consistently demonstrated across different countries (Canada and the USA) and in both stable and unstable epilepsy patients, with more pronounced cost increases in patients receiving multiple generic versions. Brand-to-generic substitutions of AEDs do not necessarily reduce overall healthcare costs and may even increase them.

Economic impact of multiple sclerosis disease-modifying drugs in an employed population: direct and indirect costs.

OBJECTIVE: The study objective is to compare the annual total medical and indirect costs of newly treated and untreated employees with multiple sclerosis (MS). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A retrospective database analysis of employer medical, drug, and disability claims database (Ingenix Employer database, 1999-2005; 17 large US companies) was conducted for employees 18-64 years of age with > or =1 MS diagnosis after January 1, 2002. Employees with > or =1 MS disease-modifying drug (DMD) claim comprised the newly treated group; employees with MS but no DMD at any time comprised the untreated, comparison group. Index date was the day after the most recent claim (treated, DMD claim; untreated, MS claim) meeting the following requirements: continuous health coverage for 3 months before (baseline period) and 12 months after the index date (study period) and actively employed during baseline. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Total medical costs and indirect (work loss) costs over the 1-year study period (2006 $US) were compared for DMD-treated and untreated MS employees, adjusting for baseline characteristics, including comorbidities. RESULTS: During the baseline, MS employees who became treated (n = 258) were younger (40.9 vs. 44.4 years, p < 0.0001) and had a higher proportion of women (72 vs. 62%, p = 0.007) than the untreated group of MS employees who never received DMD treatment (n = 322). The 3-month baseline MS-related medical costs were higher among treated MS employees ($2520 vs. $1012, p < 0.0001). There was a nonsignificant trend toward higher baseline non-MS-related medical costs in untreated versus treated MS employees. Risk-adjusted total annual medical costs ($4393 vs. $6187, p < 0.0001) and indirect costs ($2252 vs. $3053, p < 0.0001) were significantly lower for treated MS employees than for untreated MS employees. CONCLUSIONS: Initiation of MS disease-modifying drugs was associated with substantial significant medical and indirect savings for employees with MS. Study findings should be considered in the context of the study limitations (e.g., analytic focus on employees with at least 12-month follow-up; lack of clinical detail on MS severity).

Dose conversion and cost effectiveness of erythropoietic therapies in chemotherapy-related anaemia : a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate a dose-conversion ratio (DCR) between epoetin alfa (EPO) and darbepoetin alfa (DARB) and compare the costs of both drugs at the estimated DCRs using average wholesale prices (AWPs). METHODS: A search of PUBMED, CANCERLIT and references for papers and abstracts reporting on clinical trials of DARB or EPO for chemotherapy-related anaemia (CRA) identified 56 publications. A meta-analysis was conducted on the 12 eligible papers to estimate a DCR at which the two drugs were equally effective as measured by the area under the curve of haemoglobin (Hb) change (Hb AUC) at weeks 4 and 13. The DCR is based on the ratio of the coefficients of DARB and EPO doses in a regression of Hb AUC on those two variables, baseline Hb, Hb change calculation method, tumour type, and dosing frequency. Studies were frequency-weighted by the number of subjects. DCRs with confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a Monte-Carlo approach. Results from the regression were used to calculate DCRs for different dosing regimen comparisons - EPO three times weekly (TIW) versus DARB once weekly (QW), EPO TIW versus DARB once every 2 weeks (Q2W), EPO QW versus DARB QW, and EPO QW versus DARB Q2W. Relative cost effectiveness (RCE) was assessed by comparing drug costs at the estimated DCRs at $US 2003 AWPs [RCE = DCR . ($/U EPO)/($/mug DARB)]. RESULTS: The regression results suggest an EPO QW : DARB QW DCR of 187 (95% CI 183, 191). Depending on the assumed starting dose, the DCR ranges from 126 to 137 for EPO TIW : DARB QW; from 128 to 139 for EPO TIW : DARB Q2W; and equals 191 for EPO QW : DARB Q2W. RCE was 2.0 for the main regression. CONCLUSION: The DCR of 330 : 1 estimated for the 2004 Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is greater than the DCRs estimated based on Hb AUC. The DCR estimated in the primary regression suggests that based on AWPs, EPO is 2.0 times more cost effective than DARB.

Cost-minimization analysis of once-weekly versus thrice-weekly epoetin alfa for chemotherapy-related anemia.

BACKGROUND: For individuals with chemotherapy-related anemia, the clinical effectiveness of epoetin alfa (EPO) dosed once weekly ([QW], 40,000 units per dose) has been demonstrated to be indistinguishable from that observed with thrice-weekly dosing ([TIW], 10,000 units per dose). Whether the advantage of less-frequent administration justifies the higher EPO dosage used in the weekly regimen in terms of overall cost of care is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a cost-minimization analysis comparing QW and TIW EPO dosing from a societal perspective. METHODS: Direct and indirect medical cost data were calculated for a 16-week period for 2 large, prospective, multicenter, community-based studies. Costs measured included EPO, transfusions, laboratory tests, office visits, and opportunity cost of patient time. RESULTS: The average total costs in 2002 (first half) dollars were nearly equivalent across the 2 groups (QW: 9,204 dollars; 95% confidence interval [CI], 9,057 dollars-9,350 dollars. TIW: 9,265 dollars; 95% CI, 9,083 dollars-9,447 dollars. P=0.60). QW incurred mean drug acquisition costs that were 23% higher (QW: 6,725 dollars; 95% CI, 6,611 dollars-6,838 dollars. TIW: 5,474 dollars; 95% CI, 5,350 dollars-5,598 dollars. P<0.001). However, QW patients can avoid the resource use and time cost associated with 2 additional office visits incurred each week (QW: 592 dollars [583 dollars-600 dollars]; TIW: 1,709 dollars [1,678 dollars-1,740 dollars]; P<0.001). Transfusion and laboratory test costs were slightly higher in the TIW group (QW: 1,888 dollars [1,837 dollars-1,940 dollars]; TIW: 2,082 dollars [2,020 dollars-2,144 dollars]; P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Total anemia treatment costs over a 16-week period with EPO QW were similar to those of TIW dosing. In the absence of cost differences between regimens, the noneconomic advantages of less-frequent dosing intervals should make weekly dosing increasingly attractive to patients, clinicians, and payers.