Treatment costs of bladder pain syndrome/interstitial cystitis in Austria: a pharmacoeconomic approach following current guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Bladder pain syndrome/interstitial cystitis (BPS/IC) is a chronic disease with a significant impact on quality of life. A broad range of therapies are used to treat this condition, and patients are often excluded from receiving more expensive and more effective therapies because of cost issues. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the mid- and long-term costs (over 1, 5 and 10 years) of various therapies for BPS/IC. METHODS: Costs in an open-access health system (Austria) for three BPS/IC-specific therapies (intravesical hyaluronan, pentosanpolysulfate and amitriptyline), taken from the American Urological Association guidelines, were evaluated and compared with those of non-specific symptomatic therapies. Response rates for the different therapies were taken from peer-reviewed publications and used to define the need for therapy maintenance with regard to symptom improvement. RESULTS: Despite the highest initial costs, the reduced need for further therapy in patients with long-term symptom remission after hyaluronan therapy resulted in the lowest total treatment costs at all three timepoints. Hyaluronan was cost saving against all alternatives in standard assumptions and in all sensitivity analyses. As a limitation, treatment costs in this study are specific for Austria. However, the template used for calculation of treatment costs can be transferred to all countries by inserting local prices. CONCLUSION: Disease-specific therapies with high remission rates result in significantly lower long-term costs in BPS/IC. Non-specific symptomatic therapies are most expensive. Long-term cost effectiveness is crucial in the treatment of chronic diseases to limit expenses in individual healthcare systems.

Treatment choice, duration, and cost in patients with interstitial cystitis and painful bladder syndrome.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: In order to better understand provider treatment patterns for interstitial cystitis (IC)/painful bladder syndrome, we sought to document the therapies utilized and their associated expenditures using a national dataset. METHODS: A cohort was created by applying the ICD-9 diagnosis of IC (595.1) to INGENIX claims for the year 1999. Subjects were followed for 5 years, and patterns of care and related expenditures were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 553,910 adults insured in 1999, 89 subjects had a diagnosis of IC with 5-year follow-up data. All subjects were treated with oral medication(s), 26% received intravesical treatments, and 22% underwent hydrodistension. Total expenditures per subject were $2,808. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of IC expenditures were attributable to oral medical therapy. Hydrodistension and intravesical instillations were utilized in less than 25% of patients. Hydrodistension was used more frequently among subjects with a new diagnosis; this may reflect its utilization as part of a diagnostic algorithm.

Interstitial Cystitis: Cost, treatment and co-morbidities in an employed population.

INTRODUCTION: Recent literature indicates that interstitial cystitis (IC) may affect 20% of women and a smaller proportion of men, although many individuals with IC may be misdiagnosed or remain undiagnosed. Factors that can contribute to the cost of IC include medical and drug utilisation related to treatment and diagnosis of IC and associated conditions (e.g. depression), as well as employee work loss. This study assesses the direct medical cost and indirect cost of work loss for IC patients in the first year after diagnosis, and evaluates IC treatment patterns and prevalence of co-morbidities. METHODS: Data for patients under the age of 65 years with at least one diagnosis of IC (n = 749) were drawn from a de-identified, administrative database of approximately 2 million beneficiaries that included medical, drug and disability claims for 1999-2002. A 2 : 1 matched control sample of patients without an IC diagnosis (non-IC sample) was randomly selected based on patient characteristics. Indirect costs were calculated from a subgroup of 152 IC patients (plus their matched controls) who had disability information available. Costs incurred in the first year after IC diagnosis and co-morbidities were compared between IC patients and the non-IC sample, with the difference in costs defined as 'excess costs' of IC patients. Treatment patterns were profiled in the 2 months following initial diagnosis of IC. Descriptive statistics are presented. A multivariate two-part model was applied to estimate the IC direct medical cost, indirect cost and total cost to adjust for observed patient demographics and co-morbidities. Statistical significance was evaluated by the bootstrap method. RESULTS: The average IC patient had 130% higher direct costs (p < 0.05) and the average IC employee patient had 84% higher indirect costs than the average non-IC control individual. IC patients also had a higher diagnostic prevalence of prostatitis (relative risk [RR] = 40.0), endometriosis (RR = 7.4), vulvodynia (RR = 6.9), chronic pelvic pain (RR = 5.8) and urinary tract infections (RR = 5.1) [all p < 0.05]. IC patients were also more likely to report depression (RR = 2.8) and anxiety (RR = 4.5 ) than non-IC controls (all p < 0.05). Seventeen percent of IC patients received pentosan polysulfate therapy, the only US FDA-approved oral drug therapy indicated for treating IC, within the first 2 months after diagnosis. Of these patients, 69% received at least one 'other' drug from the non-approved oral medications studied. Approximately one-third of IC patients received only 'other' drug therapies, and almost half of IC patients received no drug treatment within the first 2 months after the initial diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: IC is a costly disease associated with co-morbidities. Following diagnosis, patients with IC are commonly untreated or treated with non-approved drug therapies. It is possible that more accurate diagnosis and earlier and more appropriate treatment of IC would lead to better management (or even prevention) of co-morbidities and reduce healthcare costs, and this should be investigated in future studies.