Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 1.031
Filter
1.
Int J Rheum Dis ; 27(7): e15252, 2024 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38982887

ABSTRACT

AIM: Existing studies on the cost of inflammatory arthritis (IA) and osteoarthritis (OA) are often cross-sectional and/or involve patients with various disease durations, thus not providing a comprehensive perspective on the cost of illness from the time of diagnosis. In this study, we therefore assessed the cost of lost productivity in an inception cohort of patients with IA and OA in the year before and after diagnosis. METHODS: Employment status, monthly income, days absent from work, and presenteeism were collected at diagnosis and 1 year later to estimate the annual costs of unemployment, absenteeism, and presenteeism using human capital approach. Non-parametric bootstrapping was performed to account for the uncertainty of the estimated costs. RESULTS: Compared to patients with OA (n = 64), patients with IA (n = 102, including 48 rheumatoid arthritis, 19 spondyloarthritis, 23 psoriatic arthritis, and 12 seronegative IA patients) were younger (mean age: 52.3 vs. 59.5 years) with a greater proportion receiving treatment (99.0% vs. 67.2%) and a greater decrease in presenteeism score (median: 15% vs 10%) 1 year after diagnosis. Annual costs of absenteeism and presenteeism were lower in patients with IA than those with OA both in the year before (USD566 vs. USD733 and USD8,472 vs. USD10,684, respectively) and after diagnosis (USD636 vs. USD1,035 and USD6,866 vs. USD9,362, respectively). CONCLUSION: Both IA and OA impose substantial cost of lost productivity in the year before and after diagnosis. The greater improvement in productivity seen in patients with IA suggests that treatment for IA improves work productivity.


Subject(s)
Absenteeism , Cost of Illness , Efficiency , Osteoarthritis , Presenteeism , Humans , Middle Aged , Male , Female , Osteoarthritis/economics , Osteoarthritis/diagnosis , Osteoarthritis/therapy , Presenteeism/economics , Time Factors , Adult , Aged , Unemployment , Employment/economics , Arthritis/economics , Arthritis/diagnosis , Arthritis/therapy , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/economics , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/diagnosis , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Income
3.
JAMA Netw Open ; 7(6): e2418800, 2024 Jun 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38922614

ABSTRACT

Importance: Among patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had an inadequate response to methotrexate, a treatment sequence initiated with biosimilar disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) provides better clinical efficacy compared with conventional synthetic DMARDs recommended by current treatment guidelines; but its cost-effectiveness evidence remains unclear. Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the treatment sequence initiated with biosimilar DMARDs after failure with methotrexate vs leflunomide and inform formulary listing decisions. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation's cost-effectiveness analysis was performed at a Hong Kong public institution using the Markov disease transition model to simulate the lifetime disease progression and cost for patients with RA, using monetary value in 2022. Scenario and sensitivity analyses were performed to test the internal validity of the modeling conclusion. Participants included patients diagnosed with RA from 2000 to 2021 who were retrieved retrospectively from local electronic medical records to generate model input parameters. Statistical analysis was performed from January 2023 to March 2024. Interventions: The model assesses 3 competing treatment sequences initiated with biosimilar infliximab (CT-P13), biosimilar adalimumab (ABP-501), and leflunomide; all used in combination with methotrexate. Main Outcomes and Measures: Lifetime health care cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of the simulated cohort. Results: In total, 25 099 patients with RA were identified (mean [SD] age, 56 [17] years; 19 469 [72.7%] women). In the base-case analysis, the lifetime health care cost and QALYs for the treatment sequence initiated with leflunomide were US $154 632 and 14.82 QALYs, respectively; for biosimilar infliximab, they were US $152 326 and 15.35 QALYs, respectively; and for biosimilar adalimumab, they were US $145 419 and 15.55 QALYs, respectively. Both biosimilar sequences presented lower costs and greater QALYs than the leflunomide sequence. In the deterministic sensitivity analysis, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (US$/QALY) comparing biosimilar infliximab sequence vs leflunomide sequence and biosimilar adalimumab sequence vs leflunomide sequence ranged from -15 797 to -8615 and -9088 to 10 238, respectively, all below the predefined willingness-to-pay threshold (US $48 555/QALY gain). In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the probability of treatment sequence initiated with leflunomide, biosimilar infliximab, and biosmilar adalimumab being cost-effective out of 10 000 iterations was 0%, 9%, and 91%, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: In this economic evaluation study, the treatment sequences initiated with biosimilar DMARDs were cost-effective compared with the treatment sequence initiated with leflunomide in managing patients with RA who experienced failure with the initial methotrexate treatment. These results suggest the need to update clinical treatment guidelines for initiating biosimilars immediately after the failure of methotrexate for patients with RA.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents , Arthritis, Rheumatoid , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Leflunomide , Humans , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/economics , Leflunomide/therapeutic use , Leflunomide/economics , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/economics , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Antirheumatic Agents/economics , Female , Male , Middle Aged , Infliximab/therapeutic use , Infliximab/economics , Adult , Hong Kong , Retrospective Studies , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Adalimumab/therapeutic use , Adalimumab/economics , Aged
4.
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) ; 76(7): 936-942, 2024 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38403453

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to evaluate the impact of a Multidisciplinary Care Assessment (MCA) billing code on health system costs and access to care in British Columbia (BC). METHODS: Data on all people treated by rheumatologists in BC were obtained from five linked health administrative databases held by Population Data BC from April 1, 2006, to March 31, 2020. Rheumatologists were allocated to either the intervention (ever-billers) or control groups (never-billers). For the intervention group, the index date was the month of the first MCA code billing. For the control group the index dates were imputed from intervention index dates. Our analysis focused on a 48-month period (24 months before and after the index date). We evaluated the impact on two cost (costs related to rheumatoid arthritis [RA]; total health care costs) and access outcomes (rheumatology-related visits per rheumatologist; days between rheumatology visits for patients with RA) using an interrupted time series analysis. RESULTS: A total of 46 rheumatologists (31 intervention and 15 control) met our inclusion criteria. Introduction of the MCA was associated with a small but significant increase in RA-related costs that, at 2 years, translates to a net absolute change of $9.66 per patient per month, but no statistically significant changes in total health care costs. There was no statistically significant change in the number of rheumatology-related visits, but at 2 years there was a net absolute reduction in the median days between rheumatologist visits for patients with RA (6.3 days). CONCLUSION: The introduction of the MCA code was associated with a negligible increase in the RA-related costs and an improvement in access to ongoing care for patients.


Subject(s)
Arthritis, Rheumatoid , Health Care Costs , Health Services Accessibility , Interrupted Time Series Analysis , Rheumatology , Humans , Rheumatology/economics , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/economics , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/therapy , Male , Female , British Columbia , Health Services Accessibility/economics , Middle Aged , Rheumatologists/economics , Time Factors , Aged , Databases, Factual , Adult
6.
Biomed Res Int ; 2021: 4450162, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34877355

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic progressive inflammatory disease that causes joint destruction. The condition imposes a significant economic burden on patients and societies. The present study is aimed at evaluating the cost-effectiveness of Infliximab, Adalimumab, and Etanercept in treating rheumatoid arthritis in Iran. METHODS: This is a cost-effectiveness study of economic evaluation in which the Markov model was used. The study was carried out on 154 patients with rheumatoid arthritis in Fars province taking Infliximab, Adalimumab, and Etanercept. The patients were selected through sampling. In this study, the cost data were collected from a community perspective, and the outcomes were the mean reductions in DAS-28 and QALY. The cost data collection form and the EQ-5D questionnaire were also used to collect the required data. The results were presented in the form of an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, and the sensitivity analysis was used to measure the robustness of the study results. The TreeAge Pro and Excel softwares were used to analyze the collected data. RESULTS: The results showed that the mean costs and the QALY rates in the Infliximab, Adalimumab, and Etanercept arms were $ 79,518.33 and 12.34, $ 91,695.59 and 13.25, and $ 87,440.92 and 11.79, respectively. The one-way sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the results. In addition, the results of the probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) indicated that on the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve, Infliximab was in the acceptance area and below the threshold in 77% of simulations. The scatter plot was in the mentioned area in 81% and 91% of simulations compared with Adalimumab and Etanercept, respectively, implying lower costs and higher effectiveness than the other two alternatives. Therefore, the strategy was more cost-effective. CONCLUSION: According to the results of this study, Infliximab was more cost-effective than the other two medications. Therefore, it is recommended that physicians use this medication as the priority in treating rheumatoid arthritis. It is also suggested that health policymakers consider the present study results in preparing treatment guidelines for RA.


Subject(s)
Adalimumab/therapeutic use , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Biological Products/therapeutic use , Etanercept/therapeutic use , Infliximab/therapeutic use , Adalimumab/economics , Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/economics , Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/therapeutic use , Antirheumatic Agents/economics , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/economics , Biological Products/economics , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Cross-Sectional Studies , Etanercept/economics , Female , Humans , Infliximab/economics , Iran , Male , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors/economics , Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors/therapeutic use
7.
Adv Ther ; 38(12): 5649-5661, 2021 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34636000

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: To compare the economic benefit of upadacitinib combination therapy versus tofacitinib combination therapy and upadacitinib monotherapy versus methotrexate monotherapy from improvements in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Data were analyzed from two trials of upadacitinib (SELECT-NEXT and SELECT-MONOTHERAPY) and one trial of tofacitinib (ORAL-Standard) that collected HRQOL measurements using the Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey in patients with RA. Direct medical costs per patient per month (PPPM) for patients receiving upadacitinib 15 mg once daily and methotrexate were derived from observed SF-36 Physical (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) scores in the SELECT trials using a regression algorithm. Direct medical costs PPPM for patients receiving tofacitinib 5 mg twice daily were obtained from a published analysis of SF-36 PCS and MCS scores observed in the ORAL-Standard trial. Short-term (12-14 weeks) and long-term (48 weeks) estimates of direct medical costs PPPM were compared between upadacitinib and tofacitinib and between upadacitinib and methotrexate. RESULTS: Over 12 weeks, direct medical costs PPPM were $252 lower (95% CI $72, $446) for upadacitinib-treated patients versus tofacitinib-treated patients. Medical costs PPPM at weeks 24 and 48 and cumulative costs over the entire 48-week period (difference $1759; 95% CI $1162, $2449) were significantly lower for upadacitinib than for tofacitinib. Over 14 weeks, direct medical costs PPPM were $399 lower (95% CI $158, $620) for patients treated with upadacitinib monotherapy compared with those treated with methotrexate alone. Direct medical costs at week 48 and cumulative costs over the entire 48-week period (difference $2044; 95% CI $1221, $2846) were significantly lower for upadacitinib monotherapy compared with methotrexate alone. CONCLUSION: In the short and long term, upadacitinib combination therapy versus tofacitinib combination therapy and upadacitinib monotherapy versus methotrexate monotherapy were associated with significantly lower direct medical costs for patients with RA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02675426, NCT02706951, and NCT00853385.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents , Arthritis, Rheumatoid , Heterocyclic Compounds, 3-Ring , Antirheumatic Agents/economics , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/economics , Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic , Drug Therapy, Combination , Heterocyclic Compounds, 3-Ring/economics , Heterocyclic Compounds, 3-Ring/therapeutic use , Humans , Methotrexate/economics , Methotrexate/therapeutic use , Piperidines/economics , Piperidines/therapeutic use , Pyrimidines/economics , Pyrimidines/therapeutic use , Pyrroles/therapeutic use , Quality of Life , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Treatment Outcome
8.
J Korean Med Sci ; 36(20): e143, 2021 May 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34032032

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We aimed to examine the uptake of infliximab and etanercept biosimilars in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and its economic implication for healthcare expenditure. METHODS: Using Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service National Patient Samples, we extracted RA patients who used biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) between 2009 and 2018. Descriptive statistics were used to explain the basic features of the data. We calculated the proportion of users of each bDMARD among total patients with bDMARDs half-yearly. We assessed changes in the utilization proportions of bDMARDs including 4 tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis) and 2 non-TNFis, which have been approved for RA in Korea: etanercept, infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab, tocilizumab, and abatacept, and analyzed the changes in market share of biosimilars among the bDMARDs after their introduction. Overall trends of medical costs for each bDMARD were presented over the 10-year period. RESULTS: Since the introduction of the biosimilar TNFis in 2012, the proportion of their use among bDMARDs steadily increased to 15.8% in 2018. While there has been a gradual increase in the use of biosimilar TNFis, the use of the corresponding originators has been decreasing. The introduction of biosimilar TNFis has resulted in a decrease in the medical costs of patients using either originator or biosimilar TNFis. CONCLUSION: In Korea, the proportional use of biosimilar TNFis has gradually increased since their introduction. The availability of less expensive biosimilar TNFis seems to have brought about a decrease in the medical costs of users of the originators.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents/economics , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/economics , Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals/therapeutic use , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/economics , Etanercept/economics , Etanercept/therapeutic use , Humans , Infliximab/economics , Infliximab/therapeutic use , Republic of Korea , Treatment Outcome , Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors/economics
9.
PLoS One ; 16(5): e0251334, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33956894

ABSTRACT

Quantifying the contribution of rheumatoid arthritis to the acquisition of subsequent health care costs is an emerging focus of the rheumatologic community and payers of health care. Our objective was to determine the healthcare costs before and after diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from the public payer's perspective. The study design was a longitudinal observational administrative data-based cohort with RA cases from Ontario Canada (n = 104,933) and two control groups, matched 1:1 on year of cohort entry from 2001 to 2016. The first control group was matched on age, sex and calendar year of cohort entry (diagnosis year for those with RA); the second group added medical history to the match before RA diagnosis year. The main exposure was new onset RA. The secondary exposure was calendar year of RA diagnosis to compare attributable costs over the study observation window. Main outcomes were health care costs in 2015 Canadian dollars, overall and by cost category. We used attribution methods to classify costs into those associated with RA, those associated with comorbidities, and age/sex-related underlying costs. Health care costs associated with RA increased up to the year of diagnosis, where they reached $8,591: $4,142 in RA associated costs; $1,242 in RA comorbidity associated costs; and $3,207 in underlying costs. In the eighth-year post diagnosis, the RA costs declined to $2,567 while the RA comorbidity associated costs remained relatively constant at $1,142, and the underlying age/sex related cost increased to $4,426. RA patients had lower costs when diagnosed in later calendar years. Our results suggest a large proportion of disease related health care costs are a result of costs associated with RA comorbidities, which may appear many years before diagnosis.


Subject(s)
Arthritis, Rheumatoid/economics , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Case-Control Studies , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Ontario , Sex Factors , Young Adult
10.
J Bone Joint Surg Am ; 103(16): 1499-1509, 2021 08 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33886522

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Although outcome studies generally demonstrate the superiority of a total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) over a hemiarthroplasty (HA), comparative cost-effectiveness has not been well studied. From a publicly funded health-care system's perspective, this study compared the costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) in patients who underwent TSA with those in patients who underwent HA. METHODS: We conducted a cost-utility analysis using a Markov model to simulate the costs and QALYs for patients undergoing either TSA or HA over a lifetime horizon to account for costs and medically important events over the patient lifetime. Subgroup analyses by age groups (≤50 or >50 years) were performed. A series of sensitivity analyses were performed to assess robustness of study findings. The results were presented in 2019 U.S. dollars. RESULTS: TSA was dominant as it was less costly ($115,785 compared with $118,501) and more effective (10.21 compared with 8.47 QALYs) than HA over a lifetime horizon. Changes to health utility values after TSA and HA had the largest impact on the cost-effectiveness findings. At a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $50,000 per QALY gained, HA was not found to be cost-effective. The probability that TSA was cost-effective was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: Based on a WTP of $50,000 per QALY gained, from the perspective of Canada's publicly funded health-care system, TSA was found to be cost-effective in all patients, including those ≤50 years of age, compared with HA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic and Decision Analysis Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.


Subject(s)
Arthritis, Rheumatoid/surgery , Arthroplasty, Replacement, Shoulder/economics , Hemiarthroplasty/economics , Osteoarthritis, Hip/surgery , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Aged , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/economics , Arthroplasty, Replacement, Shoulder/statistics & numerical data , Cost-Benefit Analysis/statistics & numerical data , Female , Hemiarthroplasty/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Osteoarthritis, Hip/economics , Reoperation/economics , Reoperation/statistics & numerical data , Retrospective Studies , Shoulder Joint/surgery , Treatment Outcome
11.
Orv Hetil ; 162(162 Suppl 1): 30-37, 2021 03 28.
Article in Hungarian | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33774606

ABSTRACT

Összefoglaló. Bevezetés: A rheumatoid arthritisszel kapcsolatos szolgáltatások igénybevétele nagy teher az egészségügyi rendszerek számára. Célkituzés: Elemzésünk célja volt a rheumatoid arthritis okozta éves epidemiológiai és egészségbiztosítási betegségteher meghatározása Magyarországon. Adatok és módszerek: Az elemzésben felhasznált adatok a Nemzeti Egészségbiztosítási Alapkezelo (NEAK) finanszírozási adatbázisából származnak, és a 2018. évet fedik le. Meghatároztuk az éves betegszámokat, a prevalenciát 100 000 lakosra, továbbá az éves egészségbiztosítási kiadásokat korcsoportos és nemenkénti bontásban valamennyi egészségbiztosítási ellátás tekintetében. A rheumatoid arthritis kórképet fodiagnózisként a Betegségek Nemzetközi Osztályozása (BNO, 10. revízió) szerinti M0690-es kóddal azonosítottuk. Eredmények: Meghatározó betegforgalmat a gyógyszerek ártámogatása esetében találtunk: 7015 férfi, 23 696 no, együtt 30 711 fo. A gyógyszer-ártámogatás betegforgalmi adatai alapján a 100 000 fore eso prevalencia férfiaknál 150,2 fo, noknél 464,0 fo, együtt 314,1 fo volt. A rheumatoid arthritis kezelésére a NEAK 1,64 milliárd Ft-ot (6,07 millió USD, illetve 5,14 millió EUR) költött 2018-ban. A kiadások 19,3%-a férfiaknál, míg 80,7%-a noknél jelenik meg. A gyógyszer-ártámogatás (az összes kiadás 42,8%-a), a járóbeteg-szakellátás (21,9%) és az aktívfekvobeteg-szakellátás (12,4%) voltak a meghatározó költségelemek. Az egy betegre jutó átlagos éves egészségbiztosítási kiadás 53 375 Ft (198 USD/167 EUR) volt. Következtetés: A gyógyszerek ártámogatása bizonyult a fo költségtényezonek. A rheumatoid arthritis elofordulási gyakorisága 3,1-szer magasabb a nok esetében a férfiakhoz képest. Orv Hetil. 2021; 162(Suppl 1): 30-37. INTRODUCTION: Utilisation of services related to the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis poses a great burden for healthcare systems. Objecive: Our aim was to determine the annual epidemiological disease burden and the health insurance treatment cost of rheumatoid arthritis in Hungary. DATA AND METHODS: Data were derived from the financial database of the National Health Insurance Fund Administration (NHIFA) of Hungary, for the year 2018. The data analysed included annual patient numbers and prevalence per 100 000 population and annual health insurance treatment costs calculated for age groups and sex according to all health insurance treatment categories. Patients with rheumatoid arthritis were identified as main diagnosis with the following code of the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision: M0690. RESULTS: We found a significant patient turnover in pharmaceutical reimbursement: 7015 men, 23 696 women, in total 30 711 patients. Based on patient numbers in pharmaceuticals, prevalence for 100 000 population among men was 150.2 patients, among women 464.0, in total 314.1 patients. In 2018, NHIFA spent 1.64 billion HUF (6.07 million USD, 5.14 million EUR) on the treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. 19.3% of the costs was spent on the treatment of male, 80.7% on female patients. Pharmaceuticals (42.8% of the total expenditures), outpatient care (21.9%) and acute inpatient care (12.4%) were the main cost drivers. Average annual health insurance treatment cost per patient was 53 375 HUF (198 USD/167 EUR). CONCLUSION: Pharmaceutical reimbursement was the major cost driver. The prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis was by 3.1 higher in women compared to men. Orv Hetil. 2021; 162(Suppl 1): 30-37.


Subject(s)
Arthritis, Rheumatoid , Cost of Illness , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/economics , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/epidemiology , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/therapy , Female , Humans , Hungary/epidemiology , Insurance, Health/economics , Male
13.
Rheumatology (Oxford) ; 60(10): 4681-4690, 2021 10 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33502493

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To determine the impact of difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis (D2T RA) on (costs related to) healthcare utilization, other resource use and work productivity. METHODS: Data regarding healthcare utilization, other resource use and work productivity of 52 D2T (according to the EULAR definition) and 100 non-D2T RA patients were collected via a questionnaire and an electronic patient record review during a study visit. Annual costs were calculated and compared between groups. Multivariable linear regression analysis was performed to assess whether having D2T RA was associated with higher costs. RESULTS: Mean (95% CI) annual total costs were €37 605 (€27 689 - €50 378) for D2T and €19 217 (€15 647 - €22 945) for non-D2T RA patients (P<0.001). D2T RA patients visited their rheumatologist more frequently, were more often admitted to day-care facilities, underwent more laboratory tests and used more drugs (specifically targeted synthetic DMARDs), compared with non-D2T RA patients (P<0.01). In D2T RA patients, the main contributors to total costs were informal help of family and friends (28%), drugs (26%) and loss of work productivity (16%). After adjustment for physical functioning (HAQ), having D2T RA was no longer statistically significantly associated with higher total costs. HAQ was the only independent determinant of higher costs in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The economic burden of D2T RA is significantly higher than that of non-D2T RA, indicated by higher healthcare utilization and higher annual total costs. Functional disability is a key determinant of higher costs in RA.


Subject(s)
Arthritis, Rheumatoid/economics , Cost of Illness , Financial Stress/economics , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Antirheumatic Agents/economics , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/psychology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Disability Evaluation , Efficiency , Female , Financial Stress/etiology , Functional Status , Humans , Linear Models , Male , Middle Aged , Netherlands , Surveys and Questionnaires
14.
Int J Rheum Dis ; 24(3): 314-326, 2021 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33486900

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Region-specific health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scores or utility values are representative and pivotal for economic evaluations as they are influenced by the value judgment of the local population. This study systematically reviewed and pooled EuroQoL-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) utility scores of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) across primary studies from Asia. METHODS: Studies reporting EQ-5D utility scores among adult RA patients from Asian countries were systematically searched in PubMed-Medline, Scopus and Embase since inception through February 2020. Selected studies were systematically reviewed and study quality assessment was performed. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effect model with subgroup and meta-regression analysis to explore heterogeneity. RESULTS: Among 1391 searched articles, 37 studies with 31 983 participants were systematically reviewed and meta-analysis was conducted among 31 studies. The pooled EQ-5D scores and EQ-5D visual analog score were 0.66 (95% CI 0.63-0.69, I2  = 99.65%) and 61.21 (50.73-71.69, I2  = 99.56%) respectively with high heterogeneity. For RA patients with no, low, moderate and high disease activity based on Disease Activity Score (DAS)-28, the pooled EQ-5D scores were 0.78 (0.65-0.90), 0.73 (0.65-0.80), 0.53 (0.32- 0.74), and 0.47 (0.32-0.62), respectively. On meta-regression, age of patients (P < .05) was positively associated and use of glucocorticoids (P < .05) was inversely associated with utility values. CONCLUSION: Lower EQ-5D scores were associated with severe disease activity, increasing age and female gender among RA patients. The study provides pooled EQ-5D scores for RA patients that are useful inputs for cost-utility studies in Asia.


Subject(s)
Arthritis, Rheumatoid/psychology , Health Status , Psychometrics/methods , Quality of Life/psychology , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/economics , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/epidemiology , Asia/epidemiology , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Humans , Morbidity/trends , Severity of Illness Index , Surveys and Questionnaires
15.
Rheumatol Int ; 41(4): 787-793, 2021 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33386900

ABSTRACT

The aim of the study was to estimate the annual direct costs of biological therapies in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and to establish possible factors associated with those costs. The main data source was the Moroccan registry of biological therapies in rheumatic diseases (RBSMR Registry). We included patients with available 1-year data. Variables related to socio-economic status, disease and biological therapy were collected. Direct costs included prices of biologics, costs of infusions, and subcutaneous injections. Differences in costs across groups were tested by Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Correlations analysis was performed in search of factors associated with high costs. We included 197 rheumatoid arthritis patients. The mean age was 52.3 ± 11 years, with female predominance 86.8%. Receiving one of the following therapies: rituximab (n = 132), tocilizumab (n = 37), or TNF-blockers (n = 28). Median one-year direct costs per patient were €1665 [€1472-€9879]. The total annual direct costs were € 978,494. Rituximab, constituted 25.7% of the total annual budget. TNF-blockers and tocilizumab represented 27.3% and 47% of this overall budget, respectively. Although the costs were not significantly different in terms of gender or level of study, the insurance type significantly affected the cost estimation. A positive correlation was found between the annual direct cost and body mass index (r = 0.15, p = 0.04). In Morocco, a developing country, the annual direct costs of biological therapy are high. Our results may contribute to the development of strategies for better governance of these costs.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents/economics , Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Biological Products/economics , Biological Therapy/economics , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/economics , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/economics , Biological Factors/therapeutic use , Biological Products/therapeutic use , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Etanercept/economics , Etanercept/therapeutic use , Female , Health Expenditures , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Morocco , Rituximab/economics , Rituximab/therapeutic use
16.
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) ; 73(10): 1461-1469, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32558339

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the sequences of tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) and non-TNFi used by rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients whose initial TNFi therapy has failed, and to evaluate effectiveness and costs. METHODS: Using the Truven Health MarketScan Research database, we analyzed claims of commercially insured adult patients with RA who switched to their second biologic or targeted disease-modifying antirheumatic drug between January 2008 and December 2015. Our primary outcome was the frequency of treatment sequences. Our secondary outcomes were the time to therapy discontinuation, drug adherence, and drug and other health care costs. RESULTS: Among 10,442 RA patients identified, 36.5% swapped to a non-TNFi drug, most commonly abatacept (54.2%). The remaining 63.5% cycled to a second TNFi, most commonly adalimumab (41.2%). For subsequent switches of therapy, non-TNFi were more common. Patients who swapped to a non-TNFi were significantly older and had more comorbidities than those who cycled to a TNFi (P < 0.001). Survival analysis showed a longer time to discontinuation for non-TNFi than for TNFi (median 605 days compared with 489 days; P < 0.001) when used after initial TNFi discontinuation, but no difference in subsequent switches of therapy. Although non-TNFi were less expensive for adherent patients, cycling to a TNFi was associated with lower costs overall. CONCLUSION: Even though patients are more likely to cycle to a second TNFi than swap to a non-TNFi, those who swap to a non-TNFi are more likely to persist with the therapy. However, cycling to a TNFi is the less costly strategy.


Subject(s)
Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Drug Substitution , Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Adult , Aged , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/diagnosis , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/economics , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/immunology , Cost Savings , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Databases, Factual , Drug Administration Schedule , Drug Costs , Drug Substitution/adverse effects , Drug Substitution/economics , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors/adverse effects , Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors/economics , United States
17.
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) ; 73(2): 199-206, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32475025

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Puerto Rico, to describe disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) dispensing patterns by prescriber specialty, and to illustrate the impact of RA case definition on the estimated prevalence. METHODS: This study estimated the prevalence of RA in Puerto Rico during 2016 among Medicaid and Medicaid-Medicare dually eligible beneficiaries of the Mi Salud health care plan, a federally funded health insurance program. DMARD dispensing and cost patterns were described and stratified by provider specialty. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of RA case definition on estimated prevalence. RESULTS: The prevalence of RA in 2016 was estimated to be 2 cases per 1,000 beneficiaries, with 3 per 1,000 beneficiaries among females, 4.5 times that of males. In total, 44% of beneficiaries received conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs) only, 32% received biologic or targeted synthetic DMARDs (b/tsDMARDs) only, and 24% received a combination of csDMARDs and b/tsDMARDs. Rheumatologists and a combination of specialties accounted for the highest median number of dispensed DMARDs, with 14 each. A sensitivity analysis revealed that when RA cases with ≥3 medical claims were restricted to having ≥1 DMARD claim, the estimated prevalence changed from 6 to 3 cases per 1,000 beneficiaries. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of RA in Puerto Rico in this study is lower than reported in the mainland US, possibly due to more stringent criteria to define RA. DMARD dispensing and cost patterns are similar to those found in other studies. Claims algorithms that identify RA have higher validity when pharmacy data is included.


Subject(s)
Antirheumatic Agents/therapeutic use , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/epidemiology , Insurance Benefits , Medicaid , Medicare , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antirheumatic Agents/economics , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/diagnosis , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/economics , Cross-Sectional Studies , Drug Costs , Drug Prescriptions , Drug Utilization/trends , Eligibility Determination , Female , Humans , Male , Medicaid/economics , Medicare/economics , Middle Aged , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/economics , Prevalence , Puerto Rico/epidemiology , Rheumatologists/trends , Specialization/trends , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
18.
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res ; 21(4): 775-784, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33043757

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the cost-utility of Tofacitinib (TFC) in patients with severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who had not responded well to methotrexate from the Iranian payer's perspective. METHODS: An individual microsimulation Markov model was developed to compare TFC with etanercept (ETN) and Adalimumab (ADA) over a life-time horizon. Treatment efficacy was estimated based on the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) response improvement criteria in 6 months. Changes in the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) scores were mapped onto utility values to calculate outcomes in terms of QALYs. Direct medical costs were taken from national databases. Uncertainty in model parameters was evaluated by sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: This study demonstrated that TFC was cost-effective in both scenarios. Although TFC was associated with lower QALYs than ETN (6.664 versus 6.876), it was also associated with lower costs over a life-time horizon ($42,565.04 versus $58,696.29). Additionally, TFC was found to be the dominant strategy with a lower cost ($50,299.91 versus $51,550.29) and higher QALYs gained (6.900 versus 6.687) compared to ADA. CONCLUSION: TFC was found to be cost-effective in patients with severe RA who do not respond well to methotrexate compared to ADA, ETN in Iran.


Subject(s)
Adalimumab/administration & dosage , Antirheumatic Agents/administration & dosage , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/drug therapy , Etanercept/administration & dosage , Piperidines/administration & dosage , Pyrimidines/administration & dosage , Adalimumab/economics , Adult , Antirheumatic Agents/economics , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/economics , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Etanercept/economics , Female , Humans , Iran , Male , Markov Chains , Methotrexate/administration & dosage , Middle Aged , Piperidines/economics , Pyrimidines/economics , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Severity of Illness Index , Surveys and Questionnaires , Treatment Outcome
19.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil ; 102(1): 115-131, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32339483

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To present recent evidence on the prevalence, incidence, costs, activity limitations, and work limitations of common conditions requiring rehabilitation. DATA SOURCES: Medline (PubMed), SCOPUS, Web of Science, and the gray literature were searched for relevant articles about amputation, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, back pain, multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury, stroke, and traumatic brain injury. STUDY SELECTION: Relevant articles (N=106) were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators independently reviewed articles and selected relevant articles for inclusion. Quality grading was performed using the Methodological Evaluation of Observational Research Checklist and Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Form. DATA SYNTHESIS: The prevalence of back pain in the past 3 months was 33.9% among community-dwelling adults, and patients with back pain contribute $365 billion in all-cause medical costs. Osteoarthritis is the next most prevalent condition (approximately 10.4%), and patients with this condition contribute $460 billion in all-cause medical costs. These 2 conditions are the most prevalent and costly (medically) of the illnesses explored in this study. Stroke follows these conditions in both prevalence (2.5%-3.7%) and medical costs ($28 billion). Other conditions may have a lower prevalence but are associated with relatively higher per capita effects. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with previous findings, back pain and osteoarthritis are the most prevalent conditions with high aggregate medical costs. By contrast, other conditions have a lower prevalence or cost but relatively higher per capita costs and effects on activity and work. The data are extremely heterogeneous, which makes anything beyond broad comparisons challenging. Additional information is needed to determine the relative impact of each condition.


Subject(s)
Absenteeism , Health Expenditures/statistics & numerical data , Physical Functional Performance , Amputation, Surgical/economics , Amputation, Surgical/statistics & numerical data , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/economics , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/epidemiology , Back Pain/economics , Back Pain/epidemiology , Brain Injuries, Traumatic/economics , Brain Injuries, Traumatic/epidemiology , Humans , Incidence , Multiple Sclerosis/economics , Multiple Sclerosis/epidemiology , Osteoarthritis/economics , Osteoarthritis/epidemiology , Prevalence , Spinal Cord Injuries/economics , Spinal Cord Injuries/epidemiology , United States/epidemiology
20.
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) ; 73(5): 671-679, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32100969

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The financial experience faced by working-age people with arthritis includes living below the poverty line for many. Financial distress among people with arthritis is known to contribute to poorer health outcomes, including high psychological distress and more severe pain. Despite the demonstrated societal cost of arthritis care and management, the personal costs borne by the individual are not well understood. The aim of this study was to explore the perceived financial impacts of living with arthritis among younger adults (defined as those ages 18-50 years). METHODS: A qualitative descriptive study design was used. Participants with inflammatory arthritis or osteoarthritis were recruited from the community, including urban and rural settings. An interview schedule was developed, informed by existing literature, which was piloted prior to data collection. Deductive and inductive coding techniques were used to identify financial-related themes arising from the data. RESULTS: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 21 adults (90% female) with a mix of arthritis conditions, including rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis, and osteoarthritis. Four themes were identified: direct arthritis-attributable medical costs, indirect arthritis-attributable costs, insurance and pension costs, and broader financial impacts on the family. Nonsubsidized costs were frequently referenced by participants as burdensome and existed even within the publicly funded Australian health care system. CONCLUSION: Adults with arthritis experience significant arthritis-attributable financial burden and related distress. Financial concerns should be actively identified and considered within shared clinical decision-making to provide more patient-centered care for these individuals.


Subject(s)
Anxiety/etiology , Arthritis, Psoriatic/economics , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/economics , Depression/etiology , Financial Stress/etiology , Health Care Costs , Health Expenditures , Osteoarthritis/economics , Adolescent , Adult , Anxiety/diagnosis , Anxiety/psychology , Arthritis, Psoriatic/diagnosis , Arthritis, Psoriatic/therapy , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/diagnosis , Arthritis, Rheumatoid/therapy , Cost of Illness , Depression/diagnosis , Depression/psychology , Female , Financial Stress/diagnosis , Financial Stress/psychology , Humans , Interviews as Topic , Male , Middle Aged , Osteoarthritis/diagnosis , Osteoarthritis/therapy , Pregnancy , Qualitative Research , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...