The relationship between Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and healthcare resource utilization among patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal, lung or gastric cancer.

AIMS: The ability of a patient to receive anti-cancer treatment depends on a variety of factors, including performance status (PS), which is typically measured using the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scale. This study hypothesized that there would be a strong and positive correlation between ECOG PS values and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and a strong and negative correlation with the use of anti-cancer therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with colorectal, lung or gastric cancer were included in this retrospective analysis of administrative claims data linked to electronic medical records (EMR). All-cause HCRU (hospitalization/inpatient care, emergency room visits, systemic anti-cancer therapy, radiation therapy, outpatient physician visits, hospice, home health care and key supportive care treatments such as anti-emetics, hematopoietic treatments, transfusions, and durable medical equipment) was evaluated by baseline ECOG PS value and PS over time. Adjusted multivariable regression analysis was used to assess the relationship between baseline ECOG PS and HCRU. Regression analyses were conducted to explore the relationship between other baseline variables and HCRU. RESULTS: There were 1311 patients included in this study. There was low correlation between PS and any HCRU variable or receipt of anti-cancer therapy (correlation coefficients all <0.10). In regression analyses, the proportion of patients with poor PS (PS = 2+) who were hospitalized was not significantly different from those with good PS (PS = 0/1) (28.9% versus 19.3%, p = .07). LIMITATIONS: The low rate of reporting of PS and the small sample size of patient groups in this study. CONCLUSIONS: There is very little evidence of a relationship between ECOG PS and HCRU, ECOG PS, or anti-cancer therapy in this study, in part due to low rates of and lack of variability in reported PS. There is some evidence that baseline comorbidities were significantly associated with HCRU and should be accounted for in future research evaluating HCRU.

Relationship between buprenorphine adherence and relapse, health care utilization and costs in privately and publicly insured patients with opioid use disorder.

BACKGROUND: Treatment for opioid use disorder is important because of the negative health, societal and economic consequences of illicit opioid use, but treatment adherence can be a challenge. This study assessed the association between buprenorphine medication-assisted treatment (MAT) adherence and relapse, health care utilization and costs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with opioid use disorder who were newly initiating a buprenorphine MAT regimen were identified in the 2008-2014 MarketScan® Commercial and Medicaid Databases and followed for 12 months after their earliest outpatient pharmacy claim for buprenorphine. Adherence was categorized using proportion of days covered (PDC) with buprenorphine, and patients with PDC≥0.80 were classified as adherent. Descriptive and adjusted analyses compared relapse prevalence, utilization and costs, all measured in the 12 months following buprenorphine MAT initiation, of adherent patients to patients in non-adherent PDC categories (PDC<0.20, 0.20≤PDC<0.40, 0.40≤PDC<0.60, 0.60≤PDC<0.80). RESULTS: Adherent patients were 37.1% of the Commercial sample (N=16,085) and 41.3% of the Medicaid sample (N=5,688). In both samples, non-adherent patients were significantly more likely than adherent patients to relapse and to have hospitalizations and emergency department visits. As a result, as buprenorphine MAT adherence increased, pharmacy costs increased, but medical costs decreased. Total costs (pharmacy plus medical costs) in the 12 months following buprenorphine MAT initiation decreased with adherence in Commercial patients ($28,525 for PDC<0.20 to $17,844 for PDC≥0.80). A slight decrease in total costs in the 12 months following buprenorphine MAT initiation was also observed in Medicaid patients ($21,292 for PDC<0.20 to $18,621 for PDC≥0.80). After adjustment, total costs of adherent patients in the Commercial sample ($17,519) were significantly lower compared with those of non-adherent patients (range $20,294-$24,431). In the Medicaid sample, adjusted total costs were not significantly different between adherence groups. CONCLUSION: Buprenorphine MAT adherence in the 12 months following treatment was associated with reduced odds of relapse and reduced unadjusted medical costs. For Commercial patients who were adherent to treatment, the adjusted total costs were predicted to be 30% lower than those for patients with PDC<0.20.

Development and validation of a claims-based approach to proxy ECOG performance status across ten tumor groups.

AIM: To develop a claims-based prediction model of poor performance status (PS) in commercially insured and Medicare supplemental beneficiaries with cancer. PATIENTS & METHODS: Retrospective analysis was conducted of electronic medical records (EMR) from community oncology practices linked to MarketScan claims. Multivariable logistic regression predicted PS scores from the EMR using claims-based diagnostic and procedure codes. RESULTS: The study included 8442 patients diagnosed with cancer from 2007 to 2015. Overall, 8.1% of patients had poor EMR-based PS. Bootstrapping results from the final model showed sensitivity and specificity of approximately 75% with a predicted probability cutpoint = 0.078, c-statistic = 0.821 and pseudo-R2 = 0.25. CONCLUSION: Patients with poor PS can be identified in claims data. This prediction model enables future studies evaluating cancer treatments and outcomes to account for PS.

Treatment Patterns and Associated Health Care Costs Before and After Treatment Initiation Among Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Patients in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Despite multiple treatment options, the prognosis of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) remains poor. PAH patients experience a high economic burden due to comorbidities, hospitalizations, and medication costs. Although combination therapy has been shown to reduce hospitalizations, the relationship between treatment, health care utilization, and costs remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: To provide a characterization of health care utilization and costs in real-world settings by comparing periods before and after initiating PAH-specific treatment. METHODS: This retrospective study identified PAH patients in the Truven Health MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Databases between 2010 and 2014 who initiated treatment with endothelin receptor antagonists (ERAs), phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (PDE-5Is), or soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC) stimulators. The index date was the date of the first PAH pharmacy claim. We included patients with ≥ 2 medical claims with diagnoses for PAH (ICD-9-CM: 416.0, 416.8) or PAH-related conditions and continuous enrollment in medical and pharmacy benefits for the 6 months before and after the index date. Treatment patterns were assessed at the drug class level (ERAs, PDE-5Is, sGC stimulators, and prostacyclins) from outpatient pharmacy claims during the 6-month post-index period. All-cause and PAH-related utilization and costs were measured. McNemar's and paired t-tests were used to compare patients' health care resource utilization and costs in the 6-month pre- and posttreatment periods. RESULTS: A total of 3,908 patients met the selection criteria. The study sample was 63% female with a mean age of 63 ± 15 years. Only 5% of patients began initial combination therapy for PAH, defined as claims for ≥ 2 medication classes within the first 30 days of treatment. Treatment interruption (≥ 30-day gap in days supply) of any PAH-specific medication was observed in 38% of patients. Compared with the 6-month pre-index period, the proportion of patients in the 6-month post-index period with any inpatient admission decreased, 42% versus 30% (P < 0.001). In addition, PAH-related inpatient admissions decreased in the 6-month post-index period from 7% to 3% (P < 0.001). After treatment initiation, patients' nonpharmacy medical costs decreased from $48,200 (SD = $117,686) to $33,962 (SD = $90,294; P < 0.001), mainly attributable to reduced inpatient costs. However, total average medical costs including pharmacy costs remained comparable after treatment initiation (pre-index period = $51,455 vs. post-index period = $53,923; P = 0.213). CONCLUSIONS: This study found that while patients' PAH-related pharmacy costs increased after treatment initiation, the increase was offset by reduced inpatient utilization; therefore, total health care costs remained constant. While the majority of patients in this study were treated with monotherapy, the recently completed AMBITION study indicated that initial combination therapy with ambrisentan plus tadalafil reduced PAH-related hospitalizations compared with initial monotherapy with either of these agents. Future cost analyses of patients treated with combination therapy will be required to determine the economic effect of initial combination therapy. DISCLOSURES: This study was sponsored and funded by Gilead Sciences. Ozbay is an employee of Gilead Sciences. At the time that this project and manuscript were developed, Lazarus was an employee of Gilead Sciences and may own stock/stock options. Riehle, Montejano, and Lenhart are employees of Truven Health Analytics, an IBM company, which received funding from Gilead Sciences to conduct this study. Burger and White do research with, and are paid consultants for, Gilead Sciences; they do not own equity and received no personal compensation for the work here. Burger also reports consultancy and advisory board work for Actelion Pharmaceuticals and grants from Gilead Sciences, Actelion Pharmaceuticals, Bayer, and United Therapeutics.

Characteristics and treatment patterns of US commercially insured and Medicaid patients with opioid dependence or abuse.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the demographic and clinical characteristics of commercially insured and Medicaid patients with a diagnosis of opioid dependence or abuse and to describe the pharmacological and nonpharmacological treatments received by these patients. DESIGN: This was a retrospective observational study using de-identified administrative claims data. SETTING: The analysis included commercially insured and Medicaid patient data extracted from the Truven Health MarketScan® Commercial and Medicaid Databases. PATIENTS: Patients with a diagnosis of opioid dependence or abuse from 2008 to 2014 (earliest diagnosis = index date) and a minimum of 6 months of pre-index and postindex continuous enrollment in the database. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics, medication-assisted treatment (MAT), and treatment other than MAT received following diagnosis, and the clinical practice setting in which patients received any opioid dependence-related care were reported. RESULTS: Data from commercially insured (N = 103,768) and Medicaid (N = 50,552) patients were analyzed. Common comorbid conditions included chronic pain (48.6 percent Commercial, 56.8 percent Medicaid), depressive disorder (24.0 percent Commercial, 32.8 percent Medicaid), and other substance abuse disorders (13.3 percent Commercial, 23.7 percent Medicaid). Nearly one third of both Commercial (31.6 percent) and Medicaid (33.6 percent) patients did not have any claims for psychosocial therapy or MAT during the follow-up period. Only 24.3 percent of Commercial patients and 20.4 percent of Medicaid patients had evidence of claims for both MAT and psychosocial treatment anytime following diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that there are opportunities to improve care through comprehensive and coordinated treatment for opioid dependence/abuse. Policies aimed at improving treatment access may be warranted.

Treatment patterns in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists: Higher adherence and persistence with dulaglutide compared with once-weekly exenatide and liraglutide.

AIMS: To compare adherence (proportion of days covered [PDC]), persistence, and treatment patterns among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) newly initiating glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs). More specifically, the main objectives were to compare dulaglutide vs exenatide once weekly and dulaglutide vs liraglutide. METHODS: Patients with T2DM newly initiating dulaglutide, albiglutide, exenatide once weekly, exenatide twice daily and liraglutide between November 2014 and April 2015 were hierarchically selected from Truven Health's MarketScan Research Databases. Propensity score matching was used to account for selection bias. Adherence to and persistence with the index GLP-1RA, and switching and augmentation patterns were assessed during the 6-month post-index period. RESULTS: Mean adherence for the matched cohorts was significantly higher for dulaglutide than for exenatide once weekly (0.72 vs 0.61; P < .0001) and liraglutide (0.71 vs 0.67; P < .0001). The percentage of patients achieving PDC ≥ 0.80 was significantly higher for dulaglutide compared with exenatide once weekly (54.2% vs 37.9%; P < .0001) and liraglutide (53.5% vs 44.3%; P < .0001). The mean (standard deviation) days on treatment for all matched patients was significantly higher for patients in the dulaglutide cohort compared with those in the exenatide once-weekly (148.4 [55.4] vs 123.6 [61.6]; P < .0001) and liraglutide cohorts (146.0 [56.9] vs 137.4 [60.1]; P < .0001). A significantly lower proportion of patients on dulaglutide discontinued treatment compared with those on exenatide once weekly (26.2% vs 48.4%; P < .0001) and those on liraglutide (28.0% vs 35.6%; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Dulaglutide initiators had significantly higher adherence, were more persistent, and had lower discontinuation rates compared with initiators of exenatide once weekly or liraglutide during the 6-month follow-up period.

Healthcare costs of urinary tract infections and genital mycotic infections among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus initiated on canagliflozin: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the economic impact of urinary tract infections (UTIs) and genital mycotic infections (GMIs) among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) initiated on canagliflozin. METHODS: Administrative claims data from April 2013 through June 2014 MarketScan® databases were extracted. Adults with ≥1 claim for canagliflozin, T2DM diagnosis, and ≥90 days enrollment before and after canagliflozin initiation were propensity score matched to controls with T2DM initiated on other anti-hyperglycemic agents (AHAs). UTI and GMI healthcare costs were evaluated 90-days post-index and reported as cohort means. RESULTS: Rates of UTI claims 90 days post-index were similar in patients receiving canagliflozin for T2DM (n = 31,257) and matched controls (2.7% vs 2.8%, p = .677). More canagliflozin than control patients had GMI claims (1.2% vs 0.6%, p < .001) and antifungal utilization (5.3% vs 2.6%, p < .001). Mean post-index costs to treat UTIs were lower but not significantly different for canagliflozin patients vs matched controls ($27.61 vs $37.33, p = .150). GMI treatment costs were higher for the canagliflozin cohort ($3.68 vs $2.44, p = .041). Combined costs to treat either UTI and/or GMI averaged $31.29 per patient for the canagliflozin cohort v $39.77 for controls (p = .211). Rates and costs of UTIs and GMIs were higher for females than males, but the canagliflozin vs control trends observed for the overall sample were similar for both sexes. There were no significant cost differences between the canagliflozin and control cohorts among patients aged 18-64. Among patients aged 65 and above, GMI treatment costs were not significantly different, but costs to treat UTIs and either UTI and/or GMI were significantly lower for canagliflozin patients vs controls. CONCLUSIONS: In a real-world setting, the costs to payers of treating UTIs and GMIs are generally similar for patients with T2DM initiated on canagliflozin vs other AHAs.

Transitions of Care for People with Type 2 Diabetes: Utilization of Antihyperglycemic Agents Pre- and Post-Hospitalization.

INTRODUCTION: Little research to date has examined antihyperglycemic agent (AHA) utilization among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) around transitions of care from inpatient to outpatient settings. Discontinuity of care between inpatient and outpatient settings has been associated with adverse clinical outcomes, so a better understanding of AHA treatment patterns is important. METHODS: This retrospective study assessed AHA utilization among a sample of United States adults with a T2DM diagnosis listed on an inpatient admission during 2010-2012 in the MarketScan(®) Hospital Drug database (Truven Health Analytics). AHA use while hospitalized was measured from inpatient medication administration records in that database. AHA use pre- and post-hospitalization was assessed from outpatient retail and mail order pharmacy claims in the MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental databases, which contain de-identified insurance claims from large employers and health plans. The hospital and claims databases are linked, allowing patients to be followed across transitions of care. RESULTS: The study sample (N = 8144) was 53% male, with a mean age of 66 years. Twenty-one percent had no T2DM diagnosis or claims for AHAs in the 90-day pre-hospitalization period suggesting they may have been newly diagnosed at the time of admission. Most (83%) patients used AHAs while hospitalized, but the proportions with AHA claims 30 days pre- and post-hospitalization were only 53% and 40%, respectively. Biguanides and sulfonylureas were the most common outpatient agents. Most (70%) patients who had no AHA utilization pre-hospitalization continued to have no AHA utilization post-hospitalization. About half the patients with AHA claims pre-hospitalization did not have any AHA claims post-discharge. CONCLUSION: Further research is warranted to explore the reasons why AHAs are not continued following hospital discharge. Inadequate treatment of T2DM remains an issue before and after hospitalization; inpatient stays represent an important and frequently missed opportunity to assess and optimize care for these patients. FUNDING: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC.

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

BACKGROUND: Non-adherence to antipsychotic therapy among patients with schizophrenia is a key driver of relapse, which can lead to costly inpatient stays. Long-acting injectables (LAIs) may improve adherence, thus reducing hospitalizations, but inpatient cost reductions need to be balanced against higher drug acquisition costs of LAIs. Real-world evidence is needed to help quantify the economic value of oral atypical antipsychotics compared with LAIs. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare healthcare costs and resource utilization between once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP) and oral antipsychotic therapy (OAT) in a population of Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia. METHODS: A retrospective, observational study was performed using Truven Health MarketScan Medicaid claims data from 2009 to 2012. Marginal structural modeling, a form of weighted repeated measures analysis to control for differences between cohorts and time-varying confounding, was used to estimate monthly costs of care in 2012 US dollars and resource utilization over a 12-month period for patients in each cohort. RESULTS: While per-month mental-health prescription costs were US$1019 higher in the PP cohort, approximately 55 % of this premium was offset by lower inpatient and outpatient care costs, producing a mean monthly total cost differential of US$434 (95 % CI 298-569, p < 0.0001) for all-cause costs and US$463 (95 % CI 374-552, p < 0.0001) for mental-health-related costs. Use of PP also resulted in a 0.44 and 0.47 reduction in the odds of all-cause and mental-health-related hospitalizations and a 0.09 reduction in the odds of all-cause emergency department visits (p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001, and p = 0.0134, respectively) over the 12-month follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with long-acting injectable antipsychotics, such as PP, may reduce inpatient and outpatient healthcare services utilization and associated costs. These findings also suggest that patients with schizophrenia taking once-monthly PP may stand a lower risk of hospitalization than patients on OAT.

Real-World Dosing Patterns of Atomoxetine in Adults with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.

AIMS: The aim was to investigate the dosing patterns of atomoxetine monotherapy in adult patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in a retrospective analysis. METHODS: Adult (≥ 18 years) patients with ADHD newly initiated on atomoxetine with ≥ 1 outpatient pharmacy claim for atomoxetine between January 2006 and December 2011 were selected from the Truven Health MarketScan(®) Commercial database. After a 30-day titration period, dosing patterns of atomoxetine monotherapy were analyzed in the 12 months following initiation. In addition, patient demographic and clinical characteristics were compared to identify characteristics associated with suboptimal versus recommended dosing. RESULTS: Of the 12,412 adult patients with ADHD newly initiated on atomoxetine, 4548 (36.6%) were suboptimally dosed, whereas 3323 (26.7%) were treated at recommended dose. Overall, study patients were treated at a mean (standard deviation [SD]) dose of 68.5 (44.9) mg/day. The suboptimal dosing cohort included significantly more females (54% vs. 44%, P < 0.001) and had fewer patients with pre-index use of other ADHD medications (17% vs. 20%, P < 0.001) compared with the recommended dosing cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Adult patients with ADHD receiving atomoxetine therapy in a real-world setting are often dosed suboptimally. Increasing the awareness on optimal dosing strategy among clinicians and patients is warranted to maximize the therapeutic benefits of atomoxetine among adult patients with ADHD.

Medication-assisted treatment with buprenorphine: assessing the evidence.

OBJECTIVE: Buprenorphine maintenance treatment (BMT) and methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) are pharmacological treatment programs for individuals with opioid use disorders. MMT is discussed in a companion article. This article describes BMT and reviews available research on its efficacy. METHODS: Authors reviewed meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and individual studies of BMT from 1995 through 2012. Databases surveyed were PubMed, PsycINFO, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, and Published International Literature on Traumatic Stress. They chose from three levels of evidence (high, moderate, and low) based on benchmarks for the number of studies and quality of their methodology. They also described the evidence of service effectiveness. RESULTS: Sixteen adequately designed randomized controlled trials of BMT indicated a high level of evidence for its positive impact on treatment retention and illicit opioid use. Seven reviews or meta-analyses were also included. When the medication was dosed adequately, BMT and MMT showed similar reduction in illicit opioid use, but BMT was associated with less risk of adverse events. Results suggested better treatment retention with MMT. BMT was associated with improved maternal and fetal outcomes in pregnancy, compared with no medication-assisted treatment. Rates of neonatal abstinence syndrome were similar for mothers treated with BMT and MMT during pregnancy, but symptoms were less severe for infants whose mothers were treated with BMT. CONCLUSIONS: BMT is associated with improved outcomes compared with placebo for individuals and pregnant women with opioid use disorders. BMT should be considered for inclusion as a covered benefit.

Medication-assisted treatment with methadone: assessing the evidence.

OBJECTIVE: Detoxification followed by abstinence has shown little success in reducing illicit opioid use. Methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) helps individuals with an opioid use disorder abstain from or decrease use of illegal or nonmedical opiates. This review examined evidence for MMT's effectiveness. METHODS: Authors reviewed meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and individual studies of MMT from 1995 through 2012. Databases searched were PubMed, PsycINFO, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, Sociological Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, and Published International Literature on Traumatic Stress. The authors rated the level of evidence (high, moderate, and low) based on benchmarks for the number of studies and quality of their methodology. They also described the evidence of service effectiveness and examined maternal and fetal results of MMT for pregnant women. RESULTS: The review included seven randomized controlled trials and two quasi-experimental studies of MMT, indicating a high level of evidence for the positive impact of MMT on treatment retention and illicit opioid use, particularly at doses greater than 60 mg. Evidence suggests positive impacts on drug-related HIV risk behaviors, mortality, and criminality. Meta-analyses were difficult to perform or yielded nonsignificant results. Studies found little association between MMT and sex-related HIV risk behaviors. MMT in pregnancy was associated with improved maternal and fetal outcomes, and rates of neonatal abstinence syndrome were similar for mothers receiving different doses. Reports of adverse events were also found. CONCLUSIONS: MMT is associated with improved outcomes for individuals and pregnant women with opioid use disorders. MMT should be a covered service available to all individuals.

Impact of Out-of-pocket Costs on Varenicline Utilization and Persistence.

Background: Varenicline is a smoking cessation medication. Objectives: We analyzed patients' out-of-pocket costs and utilization of and persistence with varenicline. Methods: De-identified claims data in the MarketScan® Commercial Claims and Encounters Database were analyzed retrospectively. Participants were all patients at least 18 years of age continuously enrolled in plans during 2009. Plans were categorized according to restriction (no coverage; prior authorization; smoking cessation program requirement; no restrictions) and out-of-pocket cost for a 30-day supply (low:

Impact of access restrictions on varenicline utilization.

AIM: To assess the impact of access restrictions on varenicline utilization. METHODS: Employer-sponsored health plans contributing to the MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database were categorized according to 2009 varenicline access restrictions: no coverage; prior authorization; smoking cessation program requirement; no restrictions. The cohort comprised all adults continuously enrolled in plans during 2009. Each restriction cohort was compared with the no restrictions cohort using descriptive analyses. Data were assessed using logistic regression; demographic and clinical characteristics were covariates. RESULTS: In this study (no coverage, n = 454,419; prior authorization, n = 171,530; smoking cessation program, n = 108,181; no restrictions, n = 607,389), compared with the no restrictions cohort, the odds of treatment were 71% lower (odds ratio: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.26, 0.31) in the smoking cessation program cohort (p < 0.001) and 80% lower (odds ratio: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.19, 0.22) in the prior authorization cohort (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Access restrictions were associated with significantly lower odds for varenicline utilization.

Health care costs in US patients with and without a diagnosis of osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis is a chronic and costly condition affecting 14% of adults in the US, and has a significant impact on patient quality of life. This retrospective cohort study compared direct health care utilization and costs between patients with osteoarthritis and a matched control group without osteoarthritis. METHODS: MarketScan(®) databases were used to identify adult patients with an osteoarthritis claim (ICD-9-CM, 715.xx) in 2007, and the date of first diagnosis served as the index. Patients were excluded if they did not have 12 months of continuous health care benefit prior to and following the index date, were aged <18 years, or lacked a second diagnosis code for osteoarthritis between 15 and 365 days pre-index or post-index. Osteoarthritis patients were matched 1:1 to patients without osteoarthritis for age group, gender, geographic region, health plan type, and Medicare eligibility. Multivariate analyses were conducted to assess for differences in utilization and costs, controlling for differences between cohorts. RESULTS: The study sample included 258,237 patients with osteoarthritis and 258,237 matched controls without osteoarthritis. Most patients were women and over 55 years of age. Patients with osteoarthritis had significantly higher pre-index rates of comorbidity than controls. Mean total adjusted direct costs for osteoarthritis patients were more than double those for the control group at US$18,435 (95% confidence interval [CI]: US$18,318-US$18,560) versus US$7494 (95% CI: US$7425-US$7557). Osteoarthritis patients incurred significantly higher inpatient costs at US$6668 (95% CI: US$6587-US$6744) versus US$1756 (95% CI: US$1717-US$1794), outpatient costs at US$7840 (95% CI: US$7786-US$7902) versus US$3675 (95% CI: US$3637-US$3711), and prescription drug costs at US$3213 (95% CI: US$3195-US$3233) versus US$2245 (95% CI: US$2229-US$2262) compared with the controls. CONCLUSION: The direct health care costs of osteoarthritis patients were over two times higher than those of similar patients without the condition. The primary drivers of the cost difference were comorbidities and inpatient costs.

Healthcare costs associated with osteoarthritis in US patients.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis is a chronic debilitating condition affecting many adults in the United States. This study was to compare pharmacologic treatments and costs for newly diagnosed and existing osteoarthritis patients to assess unmet medication treatment needs and economic burden. METHODS: This retrospective analysis of de-identified medical and pharmacy insurance claims from the MarketScan(®) databases identified adult patients with an osteoarthritis claim in 2007. The date of the first osteoarthritis claim in 2007 served as the index. Patients were stratified into newly diagnosed and existing cohorts, based on the presence of osteoarthritis claim(s) over the 12-month pre-index period. Utilization of pain-related medications and healthcare costs was assessed in the 12-month postindex period. Multivariate analysis was conducted to adjust costs controlling for cross-cohort differences. RESULTS: Newly diagnosed osteoarthritis patients (n = 134,584) were younger (66.0 vs. 68.0, P < 0.001), had a higher proportion of men (37.4% vs. 33.9%, P < 0.001) but lower rates of comorbidities than existing patients (n = 123,653). Significantly higher proportions of newly diagnosed patients had an inpatient admission and outpatient office visit. Higher proportions of existing patients utilized a majority of the medication classes examined. Total adjusted osteoarthritis-related costs for newly diagnosed patients were $6,811 annually (95% confidence interval [CI] $6,743 to $6,887), compared to $6,407 (95% CI $6,327 to $6,477) for existing patients. Costs of pain-related prescription drugs associated with osteoarthritis were $965 (95% CI $955 to $975) among new patients, less than the $1,117 (95% CI $1,107 to $1,129) among existing patients. CONCLUSION: Newly diagnosed osteoarthritis patients incurred higher annual costs, but lower pain-related prescription drug costs in the year following diagnosis than patients with existing osteoarthritis.

Adult ADHD: prevalence of diagnosis in a US population with employer health insurance.

OBJECTIVE: The burden of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults is increasingly recognized. This retrospective analysis was designed to estimate the prevalence of diagnosed ADHD in a population of insured, employed individuals and their dependents in the United States. METHODS: Health care claims data obtained from the MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database were analyzed. Patients with ADHD were identified by at least two diagnostic claims per calendar year. Once identified, patient records were examined for evidence of continuing ADHD. RESULTS: Between 2002 and 2007, the MarketScan database identified 342,284 patients with more than one claim for ADHD. Of these, 79,368 patients met the eligibility for the prevalence estimates. During the study period, the prevalence of diagnosed ADHD among adults increased more than three-fold: 1.24 to 4.02 cases per 1000 covered members. The largest proportion of cases was in the 18-24 years age group (42.8%-45.8% per year). Most cases were males; however, the ratio of females-to-males diagnosed increased over time. ADHD with hyperactivity was prevalent across all age groups analyzed, although more common in the 18-24 years group. Pharmacy claims showed patients receiving medical treatment for ADHD increased from 78% to 88.5%. A limitation of this study is that it is restricted to employed persons and their dependents. Thus, the results from this database may underestimate the true prevalence of diagnosed ADHD in the US population. CONCLUSIONS: While the claims database used included employed insured persons and dependents only, study results highlight the rising prevalence of diagnosed ADHD in a US adult population. The prevalence increased more than three-fold from 2002 to 2007 with the largest increase in the 18-24 years age group. These findings on ADHD prevalence highlight the need for greater attention to the medical treatment of this disorder in different age groups, particularly in young adults.

Cost of illness and comorbidities in adults diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a retrospective analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective study assessed the cost of illness and medical and psychiatric comorbidities in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) compared with adults without ADHD (matched 1:3) and adults with depression (1:1). Individuals with depression were included as a benchmark against which the burden of ADHD could be measured. METHOD: Measures of health care and employment-related costs were compared to generate estimates of medical expenditures, workplace absences, and comorbidities in adults with ADHD (using ICD-9-CM codes) who were enrolled in employer-sponsored health plans throughout 2006. Individuals with ADHD (31,752) were matched with 95,256 non-ADHD controls. The majority of individuals with ADHD (n = 29,965) were also matched with an equal number of individuals with a depression diagnosis (using ICD-9-CM codes). RESULTS: In this adult population with ADHD enrolled in an employer-sponsored health plan, medical and psychiatric comorbidities were the primary drivers of health care utilization and cost. Of note, depression was significantly prevalent among those with ADHD compared to matched non-ADHD controls (14% vs 3.2%; P ≤ .0001). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that ADHD patients with depression had a significantly higher number of medical and other psychiatric comorbid illnesses including diabetes, hypertension, asthma, irritable bowel syndrome, bipolar disorder, anxiety, alcohol abuse, and substance abuse compared to those with ADHD alone (P ≤ .0001). Patients with ADHD incurred higher total annual health care expenditures than control subjects ($4,306 vs $2,418); approximately 15% of costs were paid by the patient. The total annual costs associated with productivity losses were also higher (driven by differences in short-term disability costs) in the ADHD group compared with controls ($4,403 vs $4,209). CONCLUSIONS: Medical and psychiatric comorbidities were primary drivers of the direct health care cost associated with ADHD in adult patients. The present study demonstrated that the total costs of ADHD among adults are doubled when indirect costs associated with workplace productivity losses are included.

Risk of injury associated with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in adults enrolled in employer-sponsored health plans: a retrospective analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is linked to an increased risk of injury in children. This retrospective analysis evaluated the risk and type of injury associated with ADHD in adults. METHOD: Data were taken from the MarketScan databases, which provide details of health care claims and productivity data for individuals and their dependents with access to employer-sponsored health plans. Adults (aged 18-64 years) with ≥ 2 ADHD-related diagnostic claims (using ICD-9-CM codes) between 2002 and 2007 and evidence of ADHD treatment in 2006 (n = 31,752) were matched to controls without ADHD (1:3; n = 95,256) or individuals with a depression diagnosis (using ICD-9-CM codes; 1:1; n = 29,965). Injury claims were compared between cohorts, and multivariate analyses controlled for differences that remained after matching. RESULTS: Injury claims were more common in individuals with ADHD than in non-ADHD controls (21.5% vs 15.7%; P< .0001) or individuals with depression (21.4% vs 20.5%; P= .008). Multivariate analyses indicated that the relative risk of injury claims was higher in individuals with ADHD than in the non-ADHD control (odds ratio [OR] = 1.32; 95% CI, 1.27-1.37; P< .01) and depression (OR = 1.13; 95% CI, 1.07-1.18; P< .01) groups. Injury claims increased total direct health care expenditure; total expenditures for ADHD patients with injuries were $6,482 compared with $3,722 for ADHD patients without injuries (P < .0001). Comparison of injury-related costs were similar between ADHD patients and non-ADHD controls ($1,109 vs $1,041, respectively), but higher for depression patients than for ADHD patients ($1,792 vs $1,084; P < .01). Injury claim was also associated with increased short-term disability expenditures, as ADHD patients with injury incurred higher mean cost than those without injury ($1,303 vs $620; P = .0001), but lower than those with injury in the depression cohort (vs $2,152; P = .0099) CONCLUSIONS: Adults with ADHD were more likely to incur injury claims than non-ADHD controls or adults with depression in this sample selected on the basis of claims data rather than clinical referrals. Most injuries were relatively minor; however, individuals with injuries incurred higher total direct health care costs than those without injuries. Furthermore, the ratio of indirect costs due to workplace absence to direct health care costs was higher for adults with ADHD than for adults with depression, demonstrating not only the impact of ADHD in the workplace, but also the importance of accounting for productivity data in calculating the true economic burden of ADHD in adults.

Effects of naltrexone treatment for alcohol-related disorders on healthcare costs in an insured population.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of treatment with oral naltrexone on healthcare costs in patients with alcohol-related disorders. METHODS: Using data from the MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database for 2000-2004, we identified a naltrexone group (with an alcohol-related diagnosis and at least one pharmacy claim for oral naltrexone) and two control groups. Alcohol controls had an alcohol-related diagnosis and were not prescribed an alcoholism treatment medication. Nonalcohol controls had no alcohol-related diagnosis and no prescription for an alcoholism treatment medication. The control groups were matched three to one to the naltrexone group on demographic and other relevant measures. Healthcare expenditures were calculated for the 6-month periods before and after the index naltrexone drug claim (or matched date for controls). Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to compare the groups on key characteristics and on healthcare costs. RESULTS: Naltrexone patients (n = 1,138; 62% men; mean age 45 +/- 11 years) had significantly higher total healthcare expenditures in the pre-index period than either of the control groups. In the postindex period, naltrexone patients had a significantly smaller increase than alcohol controls in total alcohol-related expenditures. Total nonalcohol-related expenditures also increased significantly less for the naltrexone group than for the alcohol control group. Multivariate analyses showed that naltrexone treatment significantly reduced alcohol-related, nonalcohol-related, and total healthcare costs relative to alcohol controls. CONCLUSIONS: Although prior to treatment patients with alcohol-related disorders had higher healthcare costs, treatment with oral naltrexone was associated with reductions both in alcohol-related and nonalcohol-related healthcare costs.