Search

Background: While PTSD is commonly associated with multiple comorbidities, studies have yet to quantify the impact of these comorbidities on key clinical outcomes and HCRU. This study explored risks of emergency room (ER) visits, inpatient admissions (IA), suicidal ideation (SI), and treatment follow-up duration (FU), amongst PTSD patients with comorbid MDD and/or SUD., Methods: Using real-world data (RWD) generated by electronic health records accessed from the NeuroBlu database, a cohort of adolescent patients (12-17 yrs) was examined over a one-year study period following PTSD diagnosis., Results: 5794 patients were included in the cohort. Compared to patients with only PTSD (n = 3061), those with comorbid MDD (n = 1820) had greater odds of ER (4.5 times), IA (1.6 times), and FU (4.3 times). Those with comorbid SUD (n = 653) had greater odds of IA (4.5 times), shorter FU (34 days), and lower odds of ER (0.5 times). Both comorbidities (n = 260) had greater odds of ER (3.8 times), IA (2.6 times), SI (3.6 times), and shorter FU (12 days)., Limitations: These RWD had a high proportion of missingness. Health records of patients who changed service providers could not be accounted for in this study., Conclusions: Both MDD and SUD substantially elevated the risk of HCRU and suicidal ideation for PTSD patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest A. John Rush has received consulting fees from Compass Inc., Curbstone Consultant LLC, Emmes Corp., Evecxia Therapeutics, Inc., Holmusk Technologies, Inc., ICON, PLC, Johnson and Johnson (Janssen), Liva-Nova, MindStreet, Inc., Neurocrine Biosciences Inc., Otsuka-US;speaking fees from Liva-Nova, Johnson and Johnson (Janssen); and royalties from Wolters Kluwer Health, Guilford Press and the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (for the Inventory of Depressive Symptoms and its derivatives). He is also named co- inventor on two patents: U.S. Patent No. 7,795,033: Methods to Predict the Outcome of Treatment with Antidepressant Medication, Inventors: McMahon FJ, Laje G, Manji H, Rush AJ, Paddock S, Wilson AS; and U.S. Patent No. 7,906,283: Methods to Identify Patients at Risk of Developing Adverse Events During Treatment with Antidepressant Medication, Inventors:McMahon FJ, Laje G, Manji H, Rush AJ, Paddock S. Kelly Chan, Li Tong Low, Joshua Wong, and Sherwin Kuah are employees of Holmusk Technologies, Inc. when the research was undertaken., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Purpose: Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most common causes of chronic pain and a leading cause of disability in the US. The objective of this study was to examine the clinical and economic burden of OA by pain severity. Patients and Methods: We used nationally representative survey data. Adults ≥ 18 years with self-reported physician-diagnosed OA and experiencing OA pain were included in the study. OA pain severity was measured using the Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire Visual Analog Scale (SF-MPQ-VAS). Data were collected for demographics, clinical characteristics, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), productivity, OA treatment, adherence to pain medication, and healthcare resource utilization. Univariate analysis was performed to examine differences between respondents with moderate-to-severe OA pain vs those with mild OA pain. Results: Higher proportions of respondents with moderate-to-severe OA pain (n=3798) compared with mild OA pain (n=2038) were female (69.4% vs 57.3%), < 65 years of age (54.8% vs 43.4%), and not employed (70.6% vs 64.5%). Respondents with moderate-to-severe OA pain experienced OA pain daily (80.8% vs 48.8%), were obese (53.0% vs 40.5%), had more comorbidities (sleep disturbance, insomnia, depression, and anxiety), and reported significantly poorer health status and HRQoL, and greater productivity and activity impairment (all P< 0.05). Moderate-to-severe OA pain respondents were prescribed significantly more pain medications than mild OA pain respondents (41.0% vs 17.0%) and had higher adherence (75.9% vs 64.1%) yet were less satisfied with their pain medications (all P< 0.001). Outpatient and emergency room visits, and hospitalizations in the 6 months prior to the survey were significantly higher in moderate-to-severe OA pain respondents vs those with mild OA pain (all P< 0.05). Conclusion: Patient and clinical burden was significantly greater in moderate-to-severe OA pain respondents vs mild OA pain respondents and may inform decision-making for appropriate resource allocation and effective management strategies that target specific subgroups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The study objective was to estimate all-cause healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and medical and pharmacy costs for women with treated versus untreated vasomotor symptoms (VMS) due to menopause., Methods: A retrospective study was conducted using US claims data from Optum Research Database (study period: January 1, 2012-February 29, 2020). Women aged 40-63 years with a VMS diagnosis claim and ≥ 12 and ≥ 18 months of continuous enrollment during baseline and follow-up periods, respectively, were included. Women treated for VMS were propensity score matched 1:1 to untreated controls with VMS. Standardized differences (SDIFF) ≥ 10% were considered meaningful. A generalized linear model (gamma distribution, log link, robust standard errors) estimated the total cost of care ratio. Subgroup analyses of on- and off-label treatment costs were conducted., Results: Of 117,582 women diagnosed with VMS, 20.5% initiated VMS treatment and 79.5% had no treatment. Treated women (n = 24,057) were matched to untreated VMS controls. There were no differences in HCRU at follow-up (SDIFF < 10%). Pharmacy ($487 vs $320, SDIFF 28.4%) and total ($1803 vs $1536, SDIFF 12.6%) costs were higher in the treated cohort. Total costs were 7% higher in the treated cohort (total cost ratio 1.07, 95% CI 1.05-1.10, P < 0.001). The on-label treatment pharmacy costs ($546 versus $315, SDIFF 38.6%) were higher in the treated cohort. Off-label treatment had higher medical costs ($1393 versus $1201, SDIFF 10.4%)., Conclusions: Most women with VMS due to menopause were not treated within 6 months following diagnosis. While both on- and off-label treatment increased the total cost of care compared with untreated controls, those increases were modest in magnitude and should not impede treatment for women who report symptom improvement as a result of treatment., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Triple therapy (fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol; FF/UMEC/VI) has been shown to improve symptoms and reduce exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and a history of exacerbations. This real-world study compared exacerbation rates and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) before and after initiation of FF/UMEC/VI in patients with COPD previously treated with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting β 2 -agonist (LABA)., Methods: This retrospective cohort study included commercial and Medicare Advantage with Part D administrative claims data from September 01, 2016, to March 31, 2020, of patients diagnosed with COPD. The index date was the date of the first FF/UMEC/VI claim (September 2017-March 2019). The 12 months prior to index (baseline) were used to assess patient characteristics and outcomes; the 12 months following index (follow-up) were used to assess study outcomes. All patients had ≥ 30 consecutive days' supply of any ICS/LABA dual therapy during the 12 months prior to FF/UMEC/VI initiation. Subgroup analyses included patients with ≥ 30 consecutive days' supply of budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FORM) during baseline. Analyses of patients with ≥ 1 COPD exacerbation during baseline were reported as well., Results: The overall population included 1449 patients (mean age 70.75 years; 54.18% female), of whom 540 were patients in the BUD/FORM subgroup. Significantly fewer patients experienced any exacerbation during follow-up versus baseline (overall population 53.49% vs 62.59%; p < 0.001; BUD/FORM subgroup 55.00% vs 62.41%; p = 0.004). Effects on exacerbation reduction were more pronounced among patients with ≥ 1 exacerbation during baseline. Lower COPD-related HCRU was observed during the follow-up compared with baseline for both the overall population and the BUD/FORM subgroup., Conclusion: Patients with COPD treated with ICS/LABA during baseline, including patients specifically treated with BUD/FORM and those with a history of ≥ 1 exacerbation, had fewer COPD exacerbations and lower COPD-related HCRU after initiating FF/UMEC/VI., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Purpose: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma are associated with chronic inflammation of the respiratory tract; despite some overlap of symptoms, they are considered separate disorders. Triple therapy is recommended for patients with COPD and asthma whose symptoms remain uncontrolled despite dual therapy. There are limited real-world studies evaluating outcomes among patients with COPD and asthma who are receiving inhaled triple therapy. This United States (US)-based real-world study aimed to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes among patients with COPD and asthma receiving single-inhaler triple therapy (fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol [FF/UMEC/VI])., Patients and Methods: Retrospective pre-post study using claims data from the Optum Clinformatics ® database. Patients with COPD and asthma were indexed on the first date of FF/UMEC/VI prescription (1 October 2017-31 March 2019). Each patient acted as their own control. Patients were required to have continuous health plan enrollment for 12 months prior to (pre-treatment) and following (post-treatment) index. Exacerbations, all-cause and COPD-related healthcare resource utilization, and costs were compared before and after FF/UMEC/VI initiation., Results: Overall, 2743 patients were included (mean age: 71 years; 64% female). Cardiovascular disease was the most prevalent comorbidity during both the pre- and post-treatment periods (90% for both periods). There was a lower proportion of patients with ≥1 COPD exacerbation or ≥1 asthma exacerbation post-treatment versus pre-treatment (51% vs 57%, p<0.0001, and 22% vs 32%, p<0.0001, respectively). Fewer patients had ≥1 all-cause office visit post-treatment versus pre-treatment (99.3% vs 99.7%, p=0.0329); more patients had ≥1 COPD-related office visit post-treatment versus pre-treatment (89.6% vs 87.5%, p=0.0035). Total all-cause healthcare costs were significantly higher post-treatment versus pre-treatment ($72,809 vs $63,734, p<0.0001). The driver of increased costs appeared to be primarily non-COPD-related (COPD-related costs: post-treatment $27,779 vs pre-treatment $25,081, p=0.0062)., Conclusion: FF/UMEC/VI reduced exacerbations among patients with COPD and asthma in a real-world setting in the US., Competing Interests: SV was an employee of STATinMED at the time of the study; STATinMED received funds from GSK to conduct the study but not for manuscript development. RP and EI are employees of and/or hold stocks/shares in GSK., (© 2024 Igboekwe et al.)

Objective: Describe the economic burden of COVID-19 on employers and employees in the United States (US)., Methods: A targeted literature review was conducted to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on US-based employers and employees in terms of healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), medical costs, and costs associated with work-loss. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and EconLit using a combination of disease terms, populations, and outcomes to identify articles published from January 2021 to November 4, 2022. As data from the employer perspective were lacking, additional literature related to influenza were included to contextualize the impact of COVID-19, as it shifts into an endemic state, within the existing respiratory illness landscape., Results: A total of 41 articles were included in the literature review. Employer and employee perspectives were not well represented in the literature, and very few articles overlapped on any given outcome. HCRU, costs, and work impairment vary by community transmission levels, industry type, population demographics, telework ability, mitigation implementation measures, and company policies. Work-loss among COVID-19 cases were higher among the unvaccinated and in the week following diagnosis and for some, these continued for 6 months. HCRU is increased in those with COVID-19 and COVID-19-related HCRU can also continue for 6 months., Conclusions: COVID-19 continues to be a considerable burden to employers. The majority of COVID-19 cases impact working age adults. HCRU is mainly driven by outpatient visits, while direct costs are driven by hospitalization. Productivity loss is higher for unvaccinated individuals. An increased focus to support mitigation measures may minimize hospitalizations and work-loss. A data-driven approach to implementation of workplace policies, targeted communications, and access to timely and appropriate therapies for prevention and treatment may reduce health-related work-loss and associated cost burden.

Background: Pimavanserin (PIM) is the only FDA-approved atypical antipsychotic (AAP) for hallucinations and delusions associated with Parkinson's disease psychosis (PDP). Comparative real-world analyses demonstrating its benefits are needed., Objectives: To evaluate health care resource utilization (HCRU) outcomes among PDP patients treated with PIM vs. other-AAPs., Methods: Retrospective cohort analysis of Parts A, B, and D claims from 100% Medicare sample from 01 January 2013-31 December 2019 was conducted. PDP Patients initiating (i.e. index date) continuous monotherapy (PIM vs. other-AAPs) for ≥12-months during 01 January 2014-31 December 2018 without 12-months pre-index AAP use were selected after 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) on 31 variables (sex, race, region, age, and 27 Elixhauser comorbidities). HCRU outcomes included: annual all-cause and psychiatric hospitalization (short-term stay, long-term stay, and SNF-stay [skilled nursing facility]) rates, annual all-cause and psychiatric-ER visit rates, mean per-patient-per-year (PPPY) hospitalizations, and average length of stay (ALOS). PIM and other-AAPs were compared using generalized linear models (GLM) controlled for demographic characteristics, comorbidities, coexisting-dementia, and coexisting insomnia., Results: Of 12,164 PDP patients, 48.41% ( n  = 5,889) were female, and mean age was 77 (±8.14) years. Among 1:1 matched patients ( n  = 842 in each), 37.8% ( n  = 319) on PIM vs. 49.8% ( n  = 420) on other-AAPs ( p  < .05) reported ≥1 all-cause hospitalizations, respectively. Specifically, short-term and SNF-stay among PIM patients vs. other-AAPs were: 34% ( n  = 286) vs. 46.2% ( n  = 389) and 20.2% ( n  = 170) vs. 31.8% ( n  = 267) ( p  < .05), respectively. Similarly, 9.6% ( n  = 81) of PIM vs. 14.6% ( n  = 123) of other-AAPs patients had ≥1 psychiatric hospitalization ( p  < .05). Furthermore, ≥1 all-cause and psychiatric ER visit among PIM vs. other-AAPs were 61.6% ( n  = 519) vs. 69.4% ( n  = 584) and 5.2% ( n  = 43) vs. 10.2% ( n  = 86) ( p  < .05), respectively. PIM also had significantly lower ALOS, and mean PPPY short-term hospitalization and SNF-stays., Conclusions: In this analysis of PDP patients, PIM monotherapy resulted in nearly 12% and 7% lower all-cause hospitalizations and ER visits vs. other-AAPs.

Background: Pimavanserin (PIM) is the only FDA approved atypical antipsychotic (AAP) for the treatment of Parkinson's Disease Psychosis (PDP) while other off-label AAPs like quetiapine (QUE) are also used. Real-world comparative effects of PIM and QUE on health resource utilization (HCRU) may provide insights about their relative benefits., Objectives: To examine annual HCRU among newly initiated PIM or QUE monotherapy among patients with PDP., Methods: Retrospective analysis of 100% Medicare (Parts A, B, and D) claims of patients with PDP during 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2019 was conducted. Treatment-naive patients with first prescription for PIM or QUE from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2018 were selected if they had ≥12-months continuous monotherapy and had no prior AAP use for ≥12-month pre-index. Post-index 12-month HCRU was compared between 1:1 propensity score matched (PSM) PIM or QUE cohorts. HCRU outcomes included: rates of all-cause and psychiatric-related inpatient hospitalizations by stay-type [i.e., long-term stays (LT-stays), short-term stays (ST-stays), skilled nursing facility stays (SNF-stays)], outpatient hospitalizations, emergency room (ER) visits, and office visits. Relative risk and 95% confidence intervals are reported [RR (95% CI)]., Results: A total of 842 and 7,116 were treated with PIM and QUE, respectively. Mean age and gender distribution were similar among both groups. After PSM, those on PIM (n=842) had significantly lower RR for all-cause: inpatient hospitalizations [RR=0.78 (0.70-0.87)], ST-stays [RR=0.75 (0.66-0.84)], SNF-stays [RR=0.64 (0.54-0.76)], and ER visits [RR=0.91 (0.84-0.97)] vs. QUE (n=842). PIM patients had slightly higher RR for all-cause office visits [RR=1.03 (1.01-1.05)] vs. QUE. Psychiatric-related inpatient hospitalizations were also lower for PIM vs. QUE: [RR=0.63 (0.48-0.82)] ST-stays [RR=0.61 (0.43-0.86)], SNF-stay [RR=0.69 (0.47-1.02)], and ER visits [RR=0.53 (0.37-0.76)]., Conclusions: In this analysis of PDP patients, PIM monotherapy resulted in nearly 22% and 37% lower all-cause hospitalizations and psychiatric-related inpatient hospitalizations compared to QUE.

Aim: To analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on US healthcare resource utilization. Methods: Optum claims data were used to compare all-cause healthcare visits and healthcare spending for selected diseases between the prepandemic and pandemic periods. Telemedicine use was only assessed for the pandemic period owing to data availability. Results: During the first wave of the pandemic, all-cause healthcare visits across all selected disease areas displayed a rapid decline compared with the prepandemic period, followed by a period of recovery. A reduction in outpatient and home healthcare spending was observed, whereas inpatient and prescription spending increased. Conclusion: Changes in healthcare resource utilization trends were observed during the pandemic. The magnitude of these changes can inform subsequent studies that utilize COVID-19-era data.

Background Context: Improved understanding of the pre- and postoperative trends in costs and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) is needed to better inform patient expectations and aid in the development of strategies to minimize the significant healthcare burden associated with lumbar spine surgery., Purpose: Examine the time course of costs and HCRU in the 2 years preceding and following elective lumbar spine surgery for stenosis in a large national claims cohort., Study Design/setting: Retrospective analysis of an administrative claims database (IBM® Marketscan® Research Databases 2007-2015)., Patient Sample: Adult patients undergoing elective primary single-level lumbar surgery for stenosis with at least 2 years of continuous health plan enrollment pre- and postoperatively., Outcome Measures: Functional measures, including monthly rates of HCRU (15 categories), monthly gross covered payments (including payments made by the health plan and deductibles and coinsurance paid by the patient) overall, by HCRU category, and by spine versus non-spine-related., Methods: All available patients were utilized for analysis of HCRU. For analysis of payments, only patients on noncapitated health plans providing accurate financial information were analyzed. Payments were converted to 2015 United States dollars using the medical care component of the consumer price index. Trends in payments and HCRU were plotted on a monthly basis pre- and post-surgery and assessed with regression models. Relationships with demographics, surgical factors, and comorbidities were assessed with multivariable repeated measures generalized estimating equations., Results: Median monthly healthcare payments 2 years prior to surgery were $275 ($22, $868). Baseline HCRU at 2 years preoperatively was stable or only gradually rising (office visits, prescription drug use), but began an increasingly steep rise in many categories 6 to 12 months prior to surgery. Monthly payments began an increasingly steep rise 6 months prior to surgery, reaching a peak of $1,402 ($634, $2,827) in the month prior to surgery. This was driven by an increase in radiology, office visits, PT, injections, prescription medications, ER encounters, and inpatient admissions. Payments dropped dramatically immediately following surgery. Over the remainder of the 2 years, the median total payments declined only slightly, as a continued decline in spine-related payments was offset by gradually increased non-spine related payments as patients aged. By 2 years postoperatively, the percentage of patients using PT and injections returned to within 1% of the baseline levels observed 2 years preoperatively; however, spine-related prescription medication use remained elevated, as did other categories of HCRU (radiology, office visits, lab/diagnostic services, and also rare events such as inpatient admissions, ER encounters, and SNF/IRF). Patients with a fusion component to their surgeries had higher payments and HCRU preoperatively, and this did not resolve postoperatively. Variations in payments and HCRU were also evident among plan types, with patients on comprehensive medical plans-predominantly employer-sponsored supplemental Medicare coverage-utilizing more inpatient, ER, and inpatient rehabilitation & skilled nursing facilities. Patients on high-deductible plans had fewer payments and HCRU across all categories; however, we are unable to distinguish whether this is because they used fewer of these services or if they were paying for these services out of pocket without submitting to the payer. By 2 years postoperatively, 51% of patients had no spine-related monthly payments, while 33% had higher and 16% had lower monthly payments relative to 2 years preoperatively., Conclusions: This is the first study to characterize time trends in direct healthcare payments and HCRU over an extended period preceding and following spine surgery. Differences among plan types potentially highlight disparities in access to care and plan-related financial mediators of patients' healthcare resource utilization., Competing Interests: Declarations of Competing Interests The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: This retrospective analysis of the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart database evaluated US patient characteristics, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), costs, and treatment patterns among unvaccinated adults with outpatient-diagnosed COVID-19 to quantify US economic burden., Materials and Methods: The index event was the earliest outpatient diagnosis of confirmed COVID-19 from May 1 to December 10, 2020. Patients had 12 months' continuous enrollment before and were followed for ≥60 days after index date until insurance dis-enrollment or study end., Results: 236,589 patients had outpatient-diagnosed COVID-19 (7,692 with and 228,897 without subsequent COVID-19-related inpatient admission >48 h post-diagnosis). The median age was 51 years (≥65 years, 30.0%); 72.4% had ≥1 risk factor. Patients with versus without subsequent inpatient admission were more often male, older, Black/Hispanic, and had comorbidities/risk factors. With a median follow-up of 162 days, patients had a median of 1 COVID-19-related outpatient visit (with inpatient admission, 5 outpatient visits). Those with inpatient admission had a median of 1 COVID-19-related inpatient visit (median length of stay [LOS], 6 days), 33.3% were admitted to intensive care (median LOS, 8 days), 8.4%, 7.1%, and 13.3% received invasive mechanical ventilation, noninvasive mechanical ventilation, and supplemental oxygen, respectively; 13.5% experienced readmission. Inpatient mortality was 6.0% (0.3% for nonhospitalized patients). Antithrombotic therapy, antibiotics, corticosteroids, and remdesivir use increased among patients with inpatient admission versus without. Median total COVID-19-related non-zero medical costs were $208 for patients without inpatient admission (with inpatient admission, $39,187)., Limitations: Results reflect the circulating SARS-CoV-2 and treatment landscape during the study period. Requirements for continuous enrollment could have biased the population. Cost measurements may have included allowed (typically higher) and charge amounts., Conclusions: Given the numbers of the US population who are still not fully vaccinated and the evolving epidemiology of the pandemic, this study provides relevant insights on real-world treatment patterns, HCRU, and the cost burden of outpatient-diagnosed COVID-19.

Chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) is a complication of hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Although the clinical outcomes of cGVHD are well documented, few studies have assessed treatment practices outside of clinical trials. The present study aimed to quantify the prevalence of cGVHD, examine provider prescribing patterns, and evaluate the healthcare cost and resource utilization (HCRU) in a US cGVHD population. We analyzed anonymized claims from the Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) 5% sample for beneficiaries enrolled between 2013 and 2016 and PharMetrics commercial 2013 to 2018 databases to identify cGVHD in allogeneic HCT recipients. cGVHD was identified based on International Classification of Diseases Ninth/Tenth Revision diagnosis codes for cGVHD or unspecified GVHD with a first diagnosis >180 days post-HCT or a maintained unspecified GVHD diagnosis for >12 months postindex of unspecified GVHD diagnosis. Longitudinal and line of therapy (LOT) analyses were based on the PharMetrics dataset for 2013 to 2018. Healthcare costs were calculated by adding the inpatient, outpatient, and pharmacy insurer and beneficiary paid amounts for the commercially insured population. Total HCRU was assessed using the number of inpatient and outpatient visits following the initial cGVHD diagnosis. In 2016, the projected prevalence of cGVHD in the United States based on the Medicare FFS and PharMetrics commercial databases was 14,017 individual patients. Within 3 years after undergoing allogeneic HCT, 42% of patients developed cGVHD; 66% of the cGVHD patients had a prior diagnosis of acute GVHD. The majority of cGVHD patients received at least one systemic therapy; 71% and 47% of cGVHD patients progressed to a second and third LOT, respectively. A total of 24 unique therapeutic agents and more than 150 combinations were used in the second and third LOTs. Corticosteroids and corticosteroid combination therapy were the most common forms of treatment across all examined LOTs. Furthermore, the most commonly used agents in the first LOT, second LOT, and third LOT were corticosteroids only, calcineurin inhibitors only, and corticosteroids only, respectively. In the 12 months postdiagnosis, cGVHD patients had an average of 21.0 cGVHD-related inpatient and outpatient visits (2.8 inpatient and 18.2 outpatient visits). A significant proportion of allogeneic HCT recipients continue to develop cGVHD, and despite advances in the understanding of cGVHD, corticosteroids remain the mainstay of therapy. Patients often progress beyond the first LOT, at which time the utilization of systemic therapies is highly variable, demonstrating the need for evidence-based treatment approaches., (Copyright © 2021 The American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Peripheral artery disease (PAD), often treated with lower extremity revascularization, is associated with risk of major atherothrombotic vascular events (acute limb ischemia [ALI], major non-traumatic lower-limb amputation, myocardial infarction [MI], ischemic stroke, cardiovascular death). This study aims to assess healthcare resource utilization and costs of such events among patients with PAD after revascularization., Materials and Methods: Patients aged ≥50 years with PAD who were treated with lower-extremity revascularization were identified from Optum Clinformatics Data Mart claims database (01/2014-06/2019). The first lower extremity revascularization after PAD diagnosis was defined as the index date. Patients had ≥6 months of health plan enrollment before the index date. Patients were followed until the earliest of 1) end of enrollment or data; 2) diagnosis of atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism; or 3) oral anticoagulant use. All-cause healthcare resource use per-patient-year was compared before and after a major atherothrombotic vascular event post-revascularization among those with an event. Additionally, event-related healthcare costs per-patient-year were reported for each event type., Results: Of the 38,439 PAD patients meeting the study criteria, 6,675 (17.4%) had a major atherothrombotic vascular event. On average, patients were observed for 7.3 months before an event and 6.2 months after an event. Patients with an event had significantly higher all-cause healthcare resource use versus similar metrics pre-event (e.g. inpatient visits among those with ALI: 3.5 ± 5.8 post-event vs. 2.0 ± 8.1 pre-event, p  < .05). Event-related costs ranged from $57,825±$131,810 per-patient-year for ischemic stroke to $108,302±$150,168 for major non-traumatic lower-limb amputation., Limitations: Data do not contain clinical information. Additionally, results are limited to commercially insured and Medicare Advantage beneficiaries., Conclusion: Patients with PAD who experience major atherothrombotic vascular events post-revascularization have considerably higher healthcare resource use and costs compared with similar metrics pre-event. Therefore, reducing the rate of such events could reduce overall healthcare costs for this population.

Background: Research is needed to understand the impact of mental health disorders (MHD) on healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs among people with human immunodeficiency virus (PWH)., Objectives: Examine the HCRU and cost burden among treatment-naïve PWH with and without MHD initiating single tablet antiretroviral regimens (STRs) and multi-tablet regimens (MTRs)., Methods: A retrospective database analysis of the US Medicaid population from Anlitiks' All Payor Claims database between 1 January 2016 and 30 June 2023 was conducted. Treatment-naïve MTR-initiators vs STR-initiators (the index was the first prescription fill claim date) with ≥ 12-months pre- and post-index continuous enrollment and no pre-index HIV-2 diagnosis among PWH/MHD and PWH/no-MHD during 1 January 2017-30 June 2022 were selected. Demographics, clinical characteristics, HCRU and costs between MTR-initiators vs STR-initiators among PWH/MHD and PWH/no-MHD were described using Chi-square tests and Wilcoxon rank-sum or t-tests for categorical and continuous variables, as appropriate. HCRU and costs were examined using multivariable logistic and gamma-log link regression models, controlling for potential confounders., Results: MTR-initiators (PWH/MHD: n  = 7,874, PWH/no-MHD: n  = 3,612) vs. STR-initiators (PWH/MHD: 46,024, PWH/no-MHD: 23,452) were significantly younger (PWH/MHD: 43.6 vs. 47.2 years; PWH/no-MHD: 39.2 vs. 43.3 years) and more likely to be female (PWH/MHD: 46.4% vs. 35.7%; PWH/no-MHD: 42.3% vs 29.7%) in both groups (all p -values < 0.05). MTR-initiators vs. STR-initiators had significantly higher rates of inpatient (IP) hospitalizations (PWH/MHD: 28.9% vs. 27.1%; PWH/no-MHD:13.9% vs. 11.9%) and emergency department (ED) visits (PWH/MHD: 53.3% vs. 49.2%; PWH/no-MHD: 35.2% vs. 31.8%) among both those with and without MHD (all p -values < 0.05). MTR-initiators vs. STR-initiators also had significantly higher adjusted all-cause medical costs (PWH/MHD: $60,228 vs $40,634; PWH/no-MHD: $33,623 vs. $17,996) (all p -values < 0.05)., Conclusions: Among PWH/MHD and PWH/no-MHD, MTR-initiators experienced significantly higher HCRU, and 1.5 times greater costs compared to STR-initiators. In both MTR and STR-initiator groups, the PWH/MHD cohort consistently demonstrated a greater HCRU and cost burden than the PWH/no-MHD.