RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Metastasis of prostate cancer (PC) to bone (metastatic bone disease, MBD) increases morbidity, but Canadian data are lacking on the associated healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs. We quantified MBD-related HCRU and associated costs in this population, and assessed skeletal-related events (SREs), such as pathologic fracture, spinal cord compression, bone radiotherapy, and bone surgery. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, population-based cohort study using the Québec health insurance agency database. Prescription drug and medical services data were retrieved for patients with ≥1 healthcare claim in 2001 with a PC diagnosis (International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM] code of 185.xx). Patients with ≥2 MBD-related claims or an SRE were compared with a matched-control group of PC patients without MBD. Patients were followed until death, loss to follow-up, or the end of available data (August 31, 2010). Costs (in 2012 Canadian dollars) were adjusted for age, year of MBD diagnosis, general health status, and baseline resource utilization. RESULTS: Compared with controls (n = 1671), MBD patients (n = 626) had significantly higher HCRU. Adjusted mean (95% confidence interval) all-cause healthcare costs were $11 820 (7248-16 058) higher, and MBD-related costs were $3 091 (1267-4861) higher in MBD patients than in controls. Nearly 50% of MBD patients received radiotherapy within 2.5 years of their MBD diagnosis, but most exited the study without experiencing other SREs. CONCLUSION: MBD imposes a heavy HCRU and cost burden among patients with PC in Canada. Effective therapy is needed to reduce the clinical and economic impact of MBD in this population.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: To reduce pharmacy costs, managed care organizations encourage therapeutic substitution from brand to a generic product. However, little is known about whether these cost-containment strategies can also potentially lower total expenditures for payers in treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). OBJECTIVE: To compare economic outcomes of patients with MDD who were switched from a brand selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) to an alternative generic SSRI for nonmedical reasons versus patients who continued on the brand SSRI. METHODS: Adult MDD patients in the Ingenix Impact Database (2003-2007) were considered "switchers" if they received treatment with a brand SSRI and were later switched to an alternative generic SSRI for nonmedical reasons. Patients who remained on the brand SSRI (nonswitchers) were matched 1:1 with switchers. All-cause, mental health-related, and MDD-related rates of hospitalizations/emergency department (ED) visits and costs over 6 months were compared both descriptively and by using adjusted regression models. A subgroup analysis on patients who were switched from escitalopram (Lexapro) to an alternative generic SSRI was also performed. RESULTS: The study included 4449 matched pairs. Compared with nonswitchers, switchers had higher risk of all-cause, mental health-related, and MDD-related use of hospitalizations/ED visits (OR 1.15, 1.34, and 1.54, respectively; all p < 0.01) and higher risk-adjusted mental health-related and MDD-related medical costs ($219 and $222, respectively; both p < 0.05). Subgroup analysis on escitalopram showed similar results; switchers experienced higher risk of any-cause, mental health-related, and MDD-related use of hospitalizations/ED visits (OR 1.21, 1.41, and 1.53, respectively; all p < 0.01) and higher risk-adjusted MDD-related medical costs ($151; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with patients who continued on their patented SSRIs, patients who switched to a generic SSRI incurred more resource use of hospitalizations/ED visits and higher MDD-related health-care costs. The effects of therapeutic substitution should be carefully examined, because use of generic alternatives may not be a cost-saving strategy when total health-care costs are considered.
